JUDGMENT : S.P. Deshmukh, J. 1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and with consent of parties heard finally. Mr. Salunke, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner vehemently submits that impugned order dated 27-05-2014 passed by Additional Collector, Ambajogai in appeal bearing No. 2014/VPE/Appeal/03 deserves to be set aside only on the ground that the petitioner did not get proper opportunity and has been passed without hearing him. In aforesaid dispute filed by her before the Additional Collector she questions legality and propriety of no confidence motion passed against her as sarpanch of village panchayat, Babhalgaon. He, with reference to the process sheet of the matter submits that on quite a few occasions the matter was required to be adjourned for non availability of the concerned officer. The process sheet does not reflect that the matter was being adjourned for written submissions of the parties. 2. Mr. Salunke with reference to Management of M.S. Nally Bharat Engineering Company Limited v. State of Bihar, 1990 DGLS (Soft.) 67 : 1990 (2) SCC 48 submits that fairness in the procedure is the hallmark of adjudication. With reference to paragraphs 18, 19 and 20 of the judgment, he submits that ends of justice can be met with by setting aside the impugned order and relegating the matter before the Additional Collector for consideration afresh. 3. He further places reliance on application dated 21-05-2014 by respondents submitted before the Additional Collector, a copy of which is tendered across the bar, contending the same to be a photocopy of certified copy of said application obtained from the Additional Collector's office, depicting that adjournment had, in fact, been sought by respondents and as such, the matter ought not to have been decided as hurriedly as has been done. 4. Mr. Suryawanshi, learned counsel for respondents No. 5 to 10, however, submits otherwise. He disputes the fact and correctness of aforesaid application as is produced by petitioners and further submits that the petitioner avoids submission on merits and purports to take undue benefit of the application and the technicalities. 5. Be that as it may, the process sheet depicts that the matter had been adjourned at least on three occasions for want of authority in the office, being engaged in election duty. 5. Be that as it may, the process sheet depicts that the matter had been adjourned at least on three occasions for want of authority in the office, being engaged in election duty. It was only on 12-05-2014 when the matter was posted, the same could not be attended to, for, her counsel could not make it before the authority being indisposed. 6. In such a case, without going into correctness or otherwise of the order impugned, in my estimate, the petitioner deserves to be given adequate and proper opportunity to advance her case in the matter as has been expositioned in the citation relied on by the petitioner. It would therefore be proper to set aside the impugned order and remit the parties back to the Additional Collector for re-adjudication of the appeal by the present petitioner in accordance with law. 7. Accordingly, impugned order dated 27-05-2014 passed by Additional Col lector, Ambajogai in Appeal bearing No. 2014/VPE/Appeal/03 is set aside. The parties agree and are directed to appear before the Additional Collector, Ambajogai, on 12-07-2014 and from then onward shall abide by the schedule as may be fixed by the Additional Collector. After affording hearing and opportunity to parties, the Additional Collector to pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. Rule made absolute in aforesaid terms. Petition stands disposed of.