' Naimuddin, J.-- This petition under Article 199 of the Constitution of 1973 is directed against the order dated 24-10-1974, passed by the Deputy Collector (Central) Excise and Land Customs at Karachi.
1. The petitioners' case is that the impugned order was passed without hearing them and without serving any notice on them. They have in paragraph 12 of the petition stated that they had requested the respondent No,3 to inform them of the fresh date of hearing at the specified address of their Advocates. In support of their plea, they have filed copies of their two letters, dated 16-1- 1974 and 18-9-1974, which were sent to the respondent No,3 under certificates of posting.
2. The impugned order was admittedly passed without hearing the petitioner. The respondent's case, inter alia is that the notices of hearing and adjourned hearings were pasted at the factory premises of the petitioners, which was lying closed. However, in the counter affidavit the receipt of the two letters from the petitioners is not denied. It would have been but appropriate as required by principles of natural justice, for the respondent No,3, to have served the petitioners through their Advocates, whose full address was given in the two letters mentioned hereinabove, for the reason that they had informed the respondent No,3 that their managing director was a heart patient and that the factory remained closed.
3. We are, therefore, of the view that the impugned order has been passed without affording the due and reasonable opportunity of hearing to the petitioners.
We, accordingly declare the impugned order to have been made without lawful authority and remand the case to the respondent No,3 for fresh adjudication in accordance with the law. We, however, direct the petitioners to appear before the respondent No,3 on 14th December, 1983 and that no notice will be given by the department as agreed by the learned counsel for the petitioners, and if the case is not heard, another date will be fixed by the respondent No,3, for which also intimation to the petitioners shall not be necessary. We accordingly further direct, as agreed, that the petitioners shall themselves make inquiry as to future dates and they will not be heard on this account in future for the case is being remanded second time in these proceedings as the first petition was also allowed on the same ground when earlier remanded.
' The parties are left to bear their own costs.