The Orissa High Court has ruled that denying the opportunity to cross-examine witnesses before issuing orders that entail civil consequences violates the principles of natural justice.

While granting relief to the petitioners against the order of the Railway Tribunal, Dr. Justice Sanjeeb Kumar Panigrahi, the Single Bench, made the following observation:

“Justice must not only be done but must also be seen to be done. It is trite that requirement of giving reasonable opportunity of being heard before an order is made by an administrative, quasi judicial or judicial authority, particularly when such an order entails adverse civil consequences.”

The petitioners initiated a case before the Railway Claims Tribunal, Bhubaneswar, seeking compensation in the amount of Rs. 10,00,000/- for a rail accident. Responding to the petitioners' grievance, the Tribunal issued a notice to the respondent, and the hearing was scheduled accordingly.

The case was scheduled for the examination and cross-examination of the respondent's witnesses on 17.08.2023. However, due to illness, the counsel representing the petitioners requested an adjournment from the Tribunal for a virtual hearing.

Later, the counsel for the petitioners discovered from the case records that two witnesses of the respondent had already been examined by the Tribunal on 17.08.2023, and the case was scheduled for arguments on 27.09.2023. Subsequently, the petitioners filed an application to recall the witnesses for cross-examination, but the Tribunal rejected the application. Dissatisfied with this decision, the petitioners approached the High Court by filing this writ petition.

The counsel for the petitioners asserted that the testimony of the two witnesses from the respondent's side was crucial, pertinent, and directly relevant to substantiating the petitioners' claim. It was contended that the absence of the petitioners' counsel on the examination date was genuine and devoid of any malicious motive. Therefore, the plea was made for the recall of these two witnesses for cross-examination. Failure to do so, it was argued, would result in irreparable harm, injury, and prejudice to the petitioners' case.

The Court determined that the denial of cross-examination constituted a violation of the principles of natural justice. Additionally, it emphasized that a reasonable opportunity to be heard must be guaranteed before any order is issued by an administrative, quasi-judicial, or judicial authority, especially when such an order carries adverse civil consequences.

Hence, the Bench concluded that the order dated 27.09.2023 issued by the Tribunal, which did not permit cross-examination, constituted a significant violation of natural justice and warranted nullification.

Case Title: Debaraj Sahoo & Anr. v. Union of India

Case No.: W.P.(C) No. 39597 of 2023