Court No. - 29
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 23355 of 2019 Petitioner :- Kanwarwati Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- A.K. Mishra,Sati Shanker Tripathi Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Tarun Varma
Hon'ble Pankaj Mithal,J. Hon'ble Saral Srivastava,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Tarun Varma, Advocate has accepted notice on behalf of respondent no.3 Oriental Bank of Commerce.
The petitioner has preferred this writ petition against the order dated 23.04.2019 passed under Section 14 of SARFACI Act for possession of the secured asset.
Submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that though, he is admitting the liability to pay the amount demanded but as in passing the said order, no notice or opportunity of hearing was given to the petitioner, the order is unsustainable in law.
On our repeated query as to what possible defence the petitioner would be taking if opportunity of hearing had been given, counsel for the petitioner is unable to submit any reply despite he is insisting for remand of the petition on technical ground of violation of principles of natural justice even though he has no defence to raise in the said proceedings.
It is well settled that opportunity of hearing is not an empty formality and that no good purpose would be served where despite opportunity the result would remain same.
In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, coupled with the fact that the petitioner can challenge the impugned order under Section 17 SARFACI Act, we do not consider it to be a fit case for exercise of our discretionary jurisdiction.
Accordingly, writ petition is dismissed.
Order Date :- 30.7.2019 S.Sharma