been specifically held that the adjudicating authority had called
upon the Petitioners to furnish a reply to the show cause notice. A
personal hearing was scheduled on 10th March 2008, but in reply
to the notice in that behalf on 7th March 2008 the Petitioner
informed the authority under the FTDR Act that they are declared
sick and a reference under the Sick Industrial Companies (Special
Provisions) Act, 1985 was filed before the BIFR. The BIFR
recommended a winding order be passed. An Appeal was preferred
before the AAIFR and it was at the relevant time pending. Since the
factory was closed for four years, no business activities were going
on, the letters requested some time for production of papers.
Thereafter, there was further correspondence but the authority
found that there is no response. It is, in these circumstances, that
the Joint Director General of Foreign Trade imposed the penalty.
This is the common theme in all the orders and which are
impugned in the Petition. In a prior order of 17th August 2008, it is
observed that the show cause notice dated 21st April 2008 was
served. A personal hearing was scheduled on 7th May 2008. The
notice was issued but none appeared. It is in these circumstances
that each order recites that an ex parte adjudication had to be made.
