DEBANGSU BASAK,J. - (1.) An adjudication order dated February 20, 2010 is under challenge in the present writ petition.
(2.) Although the impugned order is appealable, learned advocate for the petitioner submits that, the petitioner seeks to maintain the writ petition on the ground of breach of principles of natural justice. He submits that, despite the request being made for cross-examination, his client was disallowed the right of cross-examination of the identified persons. Moreover, the petitioner was not afforded copies of all the documents which the prosecution had relied upon in the proceedings. He refers to the impugned order and submits that, the finding portion of the impugned order is a replica of the show cause notice. The impugned order does not deal with the contentions raised by the petitioner. Consequently, he submits that, the impugned order being vitiated, the same should be set aside.
(3.) Learned advocate appearing for the department submits that, the petitioner did not ask for cross-examination of the prosecution witnesses whose statements were taken by the authorities. What the petitioner requires is cross-examination of the authors of certain documents, which were relied upon in the adjudication proceedings. He contends that, the petitioner is not entitled to cross-examine the author of the documents as such authors were not introduced as witnesses into the proceedings. Consequently, the request for cross-examination was not kept. He refers diverse portion of the impugned order in support of his contention.;