TMI Blog2018 (6) TMI 975X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t. The adjudicating authority ought to have dealt with such a request made on behalf of the petitioners contained in the writing dated October 23, 2017. The impugned order is silent on such aspect. It is not a case where the petitioner is avoiding the proceedings - The petitioners will forfeit the right to cross-examination of the witnesses, in the event of their failure to commence the cross exam ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... submits that, the petitioner was denied the right of cross-examination on August 25, 2017 whereupon, the petitioners had approached the writ court. The writ court allowed the right of cross examination. The authorities fixed October 23, 2017 as the date when the cross-examination was to take place. On such date, the learned Advocate for the petitioners could not attend and wrote a letter dated Oct ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... right of cross-examination of the witnesses produced by the department. The petitioners approached the writ court when the writ court allowed the petitioners the right of cross-examination. The adjudicating authority fixed October 23, 2017 as the next date when the cross-examination would take place. It appears from the records that, the learned Advocate for the petitioners could not attend the h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... order on the first date was set aside. On the second date prayer for adjournment was made. To close the right of cross-examination in these facts would be harsh. In such circumstances, the impugned order is set aside. The petitioners will be afforded a reasonable opportunity to cross-examine the witnesses. It is clarified that, the adjudicating authority need not grant any further adjournment t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
