KALANBHAI MORARBHAI TANDEL Vs. COMPETENT AUTHORITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Mr R. K. Shah, learned advocate for the petitioner and Mr D. C. Sejpal, learned Addl. Central Government Standing Counsel for respondent No. 1.

(2.) THIS court has gone through the entire records and the documents produced by Mr R. K. Shah, learned advocate for the petitioner. It appears that the learned advocate for the present petitioner had submitted written arguments before the Appellate Tribunal when notice was issued under section 6 of the Smugglers and Foreign Exchange, Manipulators (Forfeiture of Properties) Act, 1976. However, the Appellate Tribunal, while passing the order by dismissing the matter for default, has not considered this fact, which clearly shows non-application of mind on the part of the Appellate Tribunal. Assuming that the petitioner or his advocate has not remained present during the course of the proceedings, when written arguments were submitted by the learned advocate, it is the bounden duty of the Appellate Tribunal to decide the matter on merits. In this case, the matter is not decided on merits but was dismissed for default. In this view of the matter, the matter is required to be remanded to the Appellate Tribunal for taking fresh decision on merits and in accordance with law after giving opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.

(3.) IN view of the above, the petition is partly allowed. The impugned order passed by the Appellate Tribunal dated 18. 10. 2005 and the notice dated 29. 11. 2005 are quashed and set aside. Consequently, the matter is remanded to the Appellate Tribunal for taking fresh decision on merits and in accordance with law after giving opportunity of hearing to the petitioner as early as possible preferably within a period of three months from the date of receipt of the writ of this order. It is also directed that the competent authority will not take any coercive action against the petitioner till the matter is finally decided. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent.