← Library
High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCWP/9085/2018disposed of

Suman Devi v. Deputy Commissioner Bhiwani And ORS.

2023-02-06Mr. Justice Avneesh Jhingan3 pages

     

 !" #"$%&%'()!*"+,- ,./





     

  

   1( 2 31454

   

     

    !

"#

$$$$ 54/6, 78(

&



      !'

(  )* %+ )+%,% - )+%.!!

!



/!

 /

 0  1 12

 3

!

)

45/)+%%

  !





         !!    !

/  & !    

  

 4

  )+%, !  

 /

!

    

!  !! 

 

 /



   6 /  ( 

   )- %+ )+%,  !

    !!  !  !     !!

   % - )+%.

-

7  !      

  /

   !     89! 

 !

! !

#  /

  8!

 ! !  

%--

      & 

   



  

  !!!

  !  /     89!

4  



   !  /

 

        

  / 8/  

 

 

  4    

      %% * )+%:    

!

   !      / 4



!

  /    !

 %- ;

)+%,

&   ! 

 %% )+)-   !   

9!   !!  



*

7 !       /

 / !   

( 

  



 !

!! #  /

 

 





!!

     9!   /5

4

#  /

   <% <

 !     !      9! 

=

&   '  !   



 



 4 

    !  /  !!

!





 

 

4  !/  !



  





 



    

!  !

  

   89!             ! 

!       

;

&   

   

8   ! !       

  !

  

     !

   "

##!  $

 !!

%&'(!) #**  +*,!

23. The right to fair hearing is a guaranteed right. Every person before an Authority exercising the adjudicatory powers has a right to know the evidence to be used against him. This principle is firmly established and recognized by this Court in Dhakeswari Cotton Mills Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, West Bengal 1995(1) SCR 941. However, disclosure not necessarily involves supply of the material. A person may be

0 allowed to inspect the file and take notes. Whatever mode is used, the fundamental principle remains that nothing should be used against the person which has not brought to his notice. If relevant material is not disclosed to a party, there is prima facie unfairness irrespective of whether the material in question arose before, during or after the hearing. The law is fairly well settled if prejudicial allegations are to be made against a person, he must be given particulars of that before hearing so that he can prepare his defence.

However, there are various exceptions to this general rule where disclosure of evidential material might inflict serious harm on the person directly concerned or other persons or where disclosure would be breach of confidence or might be injurious to the public interest because it would involve the revelation of official secrets, inhibit frankness of comment and the detection of crime, might make it impossible to obtain certain clauses of essential information at all in the future [See R Vs. Secretary of State for Home Department, ex. p. H 1995 QB 43."

4       

  /       ! 

 

             

 5

    !  !!    !!       

          

  !   

  

 

.

&

  

/ 

5

> ! !!  %* - )+)- %% ++ 

:

&

   

54  )!*"+,- ,./

'

? '

@   A@B ) ?  /!  A@B