AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Soumitra Pal, J.—In the writ application the petitioner No. 1 a customs house agent, is an unregistered partnership firm. The petitioner Nos. 2 and 3 are its partners. The petitioners have challenged the establishment circular No. 206/2007 dated 22nd December, 2007 issued by the Commissioner of Customs (Administration), Customs House, Kolkata, respondent No. 1 suspending the petitioner No. 1 with immediate effect principally on the ground that it does not contain the reasons or grounds for such suspension. The impugned circular is as under:
Heads of different Departments of this Customs House and other concerned departments are hereby informed that due to alleged misconduct, in exercise of power vested in me under Regulation 20 of CHALE ''04, the CHA licence bearing 1-20 of M/s. India Mercantile Agency, a custom house agent is suspended with immediate effect.
(Emphasis supplied)
It appears from the impugned circular that suspension has been carried out under Regulation 20 of the Customs House Agents Licensing Regulations, 2004 which is as under:
Suspension or revocation of license- (1) The Commissioner of Customs may, subject to the provisions of Regulation 22, revoke the licence of a Customs House Agent and order for forfeiture of part of whole of security, or only order forfeiture of part or whole of security, on any of the following grounds, namely-
(a) failure of the Customs House Agent to comply with any of the conditions of the bond executed by him under Regulation 10;
(b) failure of the Customs House Agent to comply with any of the provisions of these regulations, within the jurisdiction of the said Commissioner of Customs or anywhere else ;
(c) any misconduct on his part, whether within the jurisdiction of the said Commissioner of Customs or any where else which in the opinion of the Commissioner renders him unfit to transact any business in the Customs Station.
(2) Notwithstanding anything contained in Sub-regulation (1), the Commissioner of Customs may, in appropriate cases where immediate action is necessary, suspend the licence of a Customs House Agent where an enquiry against such agent is pending or contemplated.
(Emphasis supplied)
Relevant portion or Regulation 22 is extracted hereinbelow:
Procedure for suspending or revoking licence under Regulation 20.- (1) The Commissioner of Customs shall issue a notice in writing to the Customs House Agent stating the grounds on which it is proposed to suspend or revoke the licence and requiring the said Customs House Agent to submit, within such time as may be specified in the notice, not being less than forty-five days, to the Deputy Commissioner of Customs or Assistant Commissioner of Customs nominated by him, a written statement of defence and also to specify in the said statement whether the Customs House Agent desires to be heard in person by the said Deputy Commissioner of Customs or Assistant Commissioner of Customs.
(2) The Commissioner of Customs may, on receipt of the written statement from the Customs House Agent, or where no such statement has been received within the time-limit specified in the notice referred to in Sub-regulation (1), direct the Deputy Commissioner of Customs or Assistant Commissioner of Customs to inquire into the grounds which are not admitted by the Customs House Agent.
(3)....
(4)....
(5)....
(6)....
(7) The Commissioner of Customs shall, after considering the report of the inquiry and the representation thereon, if any, made by the Customs House Agent, pass such orders as he deems fit.
(8) Any Customs House Agent aggrieved by any decision or order passed under Regulation 20 or Sub-regulation (7) of the Regulation 22, may prefer an appeal u/s 129A of the Act to the Customs, Central Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal established under Sub-section (1) of Section 129 of the Act.
(Emphasis supplied)
I find the impugned circular suspending the petitioner No. 1 was issued by the Commissioner in exercise of the power vested under Regulation 20. Such suspension or revocation of licence of an agent is subject to the provisions of Regulation 22. Regulation 22 provides that the notice for suspension must contain the grounds on which it is proposed to suspend or revoke the licence of an agent so that the agent may submit the written statement of defence. It is explicit from a reading of Regulation 22 that the agent must be informed of the reasons of his suspension. Informing the agent of the reasons is one of basic criteria of the principles of natural justice which is ingrained in Regulation 22. Any breach of the principles of natural justice shall call for judicial intervention under Article 226 of the Constitution of India - a remedy which is speedy and efficacious.
In the instant case from the circular impugned it appears that no ground for suspension has been stated. Even assuming that the circular was issued under Sub-regulation (2) of Regulation 20, the circular impugned should have contained the reasons for suspending the petitioner No. 1 with "immediate effect". Non-disclosure of grounds or reasons in the circular was in violation of the principles of natural justice. In such circumstances alternative remedy provided under Sub-regulation (8) of Regulation 22 is no bar from moving the writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
Therefore, the circular impugned cannot be sustained and is, thus, set aside and quashed.
Hence, the writ application is allowed.