1982 (9) TMI 234 - HC - Customs

Summary

Issues:
Challenge to impugned orders Annexures P/7 and P/9 passed by Chief Controller of Imports & Exports - Petitioner ceased to be a partner of the Firm - Imposition of penalty and debarring from import licenses - Violation of principles of natural justice - Appealability of impugned order - Laches in filing Writ Petition.

Analysis:

1. Cessation of Partnership:
The petitioner, a former partner of a Firm, challenged impugned orders passed by the Chief Controller of Imports & Exports. The petitioner provided evidence, including certificates from various departments, proving his cessation as a partner from the Firm with effect from April 15, 1977. The Court accepted this fact due to the authenticity of the documents presented, establishing the petitioner's claim.

2. Imposition of Penalty and Debarment:
The respondent imposed a penalty and debarring order on the Firm, which included the petitioner. However, the petitioner, having ceased to be a partner, argued that the actions against him were illegal and violated natural justice principles. The petitioner was not personally served with a show cause notice, and upon learning of the orders, requested his name be removed from the debarment list. The Court found the respondent's actions arbitrary and ordered the impugned orders to be quashed as they did not apply to the petitioner.

3. Lack of Material and Presumption:
The respondent failed to provide material regarding unexplained import licenses and goods consumption during the relevant period. The absence of this vital information raised a presumption against the respondent. The Court noted that the impugned orders could not apply to the petitioner, given the lack of evidence linking him to the Firm during the period in question.

4. Appealability and Laches:
The respondent argued that the impugned order was appealable, and the Writ Petition was not competent due to laches. However, the Court rejected these objections, emphasizing that the petitioner was unaware of the order being passed and promptly sought redress upon learning of it. The Court held that the objections regarding appealability and laches were not tenable in the given circumstances.

5. Court's Decision:
The Court allowed the Writ Petition, quashing the impugned orders and directing the respondent to remove the petitioner's name from the debarment list. The Court found in favor of the petitioner, emphasizing the illegality and violation of natural justice principles in the actions taken against him. No costs were awarded in the matter.

This detailed analysis covers the issues raised in the Writ Petition challenging the impugned orders passed by the Chief Controller of Imports & Exports, highlighting the key arguments, evidence presented, and the Court's decision based on the legal principles and facts of the case.