An order passed without effective hearing after unserved notice violates natural justice.

The petitioner challenged the Commissioner, Surguja Division’s order dated 06.01.2020 passed in Revenue Case No. 171/A-23-/2012-2013.

He contended that although the Commissioner directed issuance of notice on 26.11.2019, the notice fixed for appearance on 10.12.2019 was returned unserved on 09.12.2019, and the revision was thereafter decided without granting him an effective opportunity of hearing.

The State argued that the notice had merely remained unserved and that the order was not passed without notice.

Respondents No. 5 to 10 accepted that the notice remained unserved and supported remand of the matter for fresh consideration.

1. Whether the Commissioner’s order dated 06.01.2020 was vitiated for having been passed without affording the petitioner due and effective notice and an opportunity of hearing.

2. Whether the matter ought to be remanded to the Commissioner for fresh adjudication after hearing all concerned parties.

The Court applied the principles of natural justice, particularly the audi alteram partem rule, which requires that a person likely to be affected by an adverse administrative or quasi-judicial decision must receive due and effective notice and a reasonable opportunity of hearing before the decision is rendered.

An order passed without such effective opportunity cannot be sustained in law and may be set aside, with the matter remanded for fresh consideration in accordance with law.

No specific statutory provision or precedent was cited in the judgment.

The Court examined the order-sheet and service report and found that the notice issued to the petitioner had been returned unserved on 09.12.2019.

Since the impugned order was passed on 06.01.2020 without the petitioner having received an effective opportunity to appear and present his case, the requirement of natural justice was not satisfied.

The fact that notice had been issued but remained unserved did not cure the denial of an effective hearing.

Accordingly, the Commissioner’s order was held legally unsustainable and was required to be set aside.

The matter was remanded to the Commissioner, Surguja Division, Ambikapur, for fresh decision on merits after affording due and effective opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and all other concerned parties.

The petitioner was directed to appear before the Commissioner on 12.10.2026.

The Court clarified that it had expressed no opinion on the merits, and the writ petition was accordingly disposed of.