TMI Blog2016 (3) TMI 658X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t to enquire, at this stage, into whether the Petitioners were denied a hearing by the Settlement Commission. Moreover, the question of the Settlement Commission becoming a party to these proceedings to contest such an allegation simply does not arise. More importantly, with orders having been reserved on the applications, the question of issuing a writ of prohibition to the Settlement Commission ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... New Delhi ( Settlement Commission') prohibiting it to continue proceedings or to give opportunity of hearing, leading/submitting evidence and to work out the matter and continue the proceedings in the Settlement Cases being Application File No. C-2782- 2787/CUS/2015-SC (PB) [M/s. Millennium Appliances Ltd. others] and Application File No. C-2767 -2775/CUS/2015-SC (PM) [M/s. Applicomp (Ind ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not give the Petitioners an opportunity of being heard. 7. Mr. Andhayarujina, learned Senior counsel asserts that the Petitioners' have every reason to believe that the orders in the said applications would be adverse to the Petitioners and therefore, the Petitioners seek interference by this Court at this stage itself. 8. In the considered view of this Court, these petitions are pre-mat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rohibition lies not only for excess of jurisdiction or for absence of jurisdiction but the writ also lies in a case of departure from the rules of natural justice. 9. As far as the present case is concerned, it is not the contention of the Petitioners that the Settlement Commission lacks jurisdiction. They seek to bring their case within the ambit of the expression departure from the rules ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
