Aninul Khan vs Commissioner of Customs

Issue notice. Mr. Satish Kumar, Advocate accepts notice. The petitioner is a ''G'' Card holder, issued in his favour by respondent No. 2. This ''G'' Card (G Card No. 21/2006) allows him to access the Customs Areas to carry out activities on the part of its principal/employer. He is aggrieved by orders dated 22-1-2014 and 14-3-2014 issued by respondent No. 2 to the Customs House Agent (current employer of the petitioner) to surrender the ''G'' Card. It is contended that the order is perverse inasmuch as, it has divested him of his livelihood and visited him with extremely adverse circumstances. The petitioner relies upon the provisions of the Customs Brokers Licensing Regulations, 2013 and submits that in the absence of express substantial order, the direction to surrender the ''G'' Card in fact, amounts to depriving him of his right to livelihood without affording him any hearing.

The petitioner relies upon the previous order of this Court in Sanjeev Maggu Vs. Commissioner of Customs General, . The learned counsel for the Revenue submits that there is no provision in regulations entitling the petitioner to a hearing or a show cause notice of the kind that the petitioner claims as a pre-condition for suspension and that till date the CHA licence has not been suspended. It is contended that the allegations against the petitioner are serious enough to warrant some kind of a preventive action.

The CHA regulations, although strictly not applicable in the facts of this case since the petitioner, concededly, is an employee of the CHA licencee, mandate by Regulation 19(1) that the Commissioner may in appropriate cases where ''immediate action is necessary'' suspended licences of a Customs Agent where an inquiry is contemplated against him. Regulation 19(2) is important in the facts of this case; it mandates that the Commissioner has to within 15 days from suspension give an opportunity to the CHA for a hearing and after such hearing pass an order as it deems appropriate, revoking the suspension or continuing it. In either case the order has to be made within 15 days of the grant of hearing.

In the present case, undoubtedly, the petitioner is not a CHA licencee, yet the action of the respondent directing him to surrender the ''G'' Card has factually deprived him for his livelihood for the past four months. As to whether the respondents ultimately propose to suspend the CHA licence or give a show cause notice is not known. In other words, the petitioner is at mercy of the respondents for an indefinite period.

In these circumstances, the respondents may grant a hearing to the petitioner and thereafter, pass a speaking order as in terms of the Regulation 19(2). A direction is accordingly issued to the concerned Commissioner to afford a hearing to the petitioner. The petitioner shall appear before the concerned Commissioner under Regulation 19 on 30-5-2014 at 11:00 AM. After granting him the hearing, the said Commissioner shall pass an order either revoking or confirming the direction to surrender the ''G'' Card, within 15 days, in terms of the said regulation 19(2).

The writ petition is allowed in the above terms.