- 1 - IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY O.O.C.J. WRIT PETITION NO.2453 OF 2008 AND WRIT PETITION NO.2454 OF 2008 AND WRIT PETITION NO.2455 OF 2008 ----------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court’s or Judge’s appearances, Court’s orders order or directions ----------------------------------------------------- ¦ Mr.V.Ramchandran i/b ¦ A.K.Jasani for the Appellants. ¦ Mr.B.M.Chatterjee for the ¦ Respondent. ¦ ¦ ¦ CORAM: D.K.DESHMUKH & ¦ J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ. ¦ DATED: 23RD OCTOBER, 2008 P.C.: By these petitions the Petitioners challenge two orders, one dated 11-2-2008 and other dated 20-2-2008. By those orders the application under Section 279 made by the Petitioners for compounding of offences has been rejected. 2. The short grievance made against the order is that the application made by the Petitioners for compounding of the offences has been rejected without giving the Petitioners an opportunity of being heard. It is common ground that the - 2 - Petitioners were not given an opportunity of being heard before order rejecting the application was made. 3. Perusal of the applications filed for compounding of the offences shows that there are several grounds raised by the Petitioners in support of their application that the offences against them should be compounded. They also relied on the guide-lines issued by the Department which are to be followed in such cases. In our opinion, considering that the order had drastic consequences and the issue was complicated, it was necessary for the authority to grant an opportunity of being heard to the Petitioners before making the order. 4. In this situation, in our opinion, following order would meet the ends of justice. O R D E R (i) Both orders impugned in the petitions are set aside. - 3 - (ii) Proceedings are remitted back to the Chief Commissioner for denovo consideration and decision in accordance with law. (iii) It is made clear that before passing the order the Chief Commissioner shall grant an opportunity of being heard to the Petitioners. (iv) Complaints that have been filed pursuant to the orders impugned in the petitions shall be kept pending till fresh order is made. (v) It goes without saying that in case fresh order is in favour of the Petitioners, then the complaints shall be withdrawn. If it goes against the Petitioners, then the Department shall be entitled to prosecute the complaints. (vi) Rule made absolute accordingly. No order as to costs. (D.K.DESHMUKH, J.) - 4 - (J.P.DEVADHAR,J.)