TMI Blog2003 (11) TMI 327X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rein had no statutory right to file a revision application only because his application requesting the Commissioner to exercise suo motu revisional powers had not been entertained, the same would not mean that any order prejudicial to him had been passed. - Civil Appeal No. 225 of 1999, W.A. No. 637 of 1991 - - - Dated:- 20-11-2003 - KHARE V.N., AND SINHA S.B. JJ. M.R. Ramesh Babu, Advocate, for the appellants. -------------------------------------------------- ORDER In the year 1989, the Excise Circle Inspector seized a lorry and 45 barrels of spirit under the Abkari Act, alleged to be owned by the respondent. The driver and the cleaner compounded the offence before the Excise Circle Inspector on payment of fine o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t runs as under: "67F. Revision.-(1) The Commissioner may, before the expiry of thirty days from the date of an order passed under section 67B or section 67E, on his own motion, call for and examine the record of that order and may make such inquiry or cause such inquiry to be made and may pass such orders as he deems fit: Provided that the Commissioner shall not call for and examine the record of any order passed under section 67B if an appeal against such order is pending before the appellate authority: Provided further that no order prejudicial to a person shall be passed under this section without giving him an opportunity of being heard. (2) An order of the Commissioner under sub-section (1) shall be final and shall not b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or that matter assignment of reasons by the Commissioner would not be necessary. 5.. The question may also be considered from another angle. The second proviso appended to section 67F of the Act provides that no order prejudicial to a person can be passed under this section without giving him an opportunity of being heard. The principles of natural justice by reason of the aforementioned statutory provision, therefore, have been extended only in a case where the proceeding is initiated in terms of the said provision and the order is proposed to be passed which would be prejudicial to the parties to the lis. As the respondent herein had no statutory right to file a revision application only because his application requesting the Commission ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
