UNION OF INDIA Vs. RAJ KUMAR CHAWALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IT is submitted by Mr. Kamal Dave, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner that controversy in question is covered by the order dated 13.4.2012 passed in similar CWP No.12749/2011. Following order was passed in this case-

(2.) BY impugned order, the Tribunal allowed the O.A. of respondents herein in limine without issuing any notice to the respondents of the O.A. i.e. present writ petitioners.

(3.) WE, however, do not wish to embark upon the merits of the controversy and are inclined to set aside the impugned order only on the ground that since it was passed behind the back of the respondents and hence not legally sustainable. It is a well settled principle of law that no man can be condemned unheard and no decision can be taken behind his back unless he is afforded an opportunity of being heard. This principle applies to the facts of this case in writ petitioners' favour.