2010 (1) TMI 584 - HC - Customs

Customs house clearing agent - order was issued under the provision of Regulation 20(2) of the Custom House Agent Licensing Regulations, 2004 - contemplation of initiation of proceedings for revocation of license - suspension cannot continue for an indefinite period - no steps have been taken to initiate the proceedings for revocation of license - no action is taken within one month the order of suspension will stand revoked automatically and the petitioner shall be allowed to resume function as a clearing agent without any demur or disturbance

Summary

Issues:
1. Impugned order suspending the petitioner as a customs house clearing agent.
2. Permissibility of suspension order under Regulation 20(2) of the Custom House Agent Licensing Regulations, 2004.
3. Duration of suspension order and initiation of revocation proceedings.
4. Timeframe for conclusion of revocation proceedings.
5. Resolution of the writ petition.

The High Court of Calcutta was presented with a case where a writ petition challenged an order suspending the petitioner, a customs house clearing agent, under Regulation 20(2) of the Custom House Agent Licensing Regulations, 2004. The court noted that such an interim suspension order pending revocation proceedings was permissible under the regulation. However, it emphasized that the suspension could not continue indefinitely. The petitioner's counsel highlighted the lack of progress in initiating the revocation proceedings, while the respondent's counsel failed to provide any updates on the matter.

Considering the circumstances, the court decided that if the Customs Authority did not initiate revocation proceedings within one month from the date of the order, the suspension would automatically be revoked, allowing the petitioner to resume duties without hindrance. Furthermore, if proceedings were initiated but not concluded within three months, the suspension would again be automatically revoked after four months from the date of the order. The court aimed to ensure that justice was served promptly and fairly in such matters.

The court disposed of the writ petition based on the above order, indicating that the question posed by the Single Judge did not need to be addressed. It was noted that the respondents did not admit the allegations in the petition as no affidavit had been requested. All parties involved were instructed to comply with the court's order based on a signed copy, adhering to the usual undertakings. The judgment provided a clear framework for addressing the suspension and revocation proceedings concerning the petitioner's customs house agent license.