2023 (3) TMI 903 - HC - Customs

Seeking appointment of another officer having the same rank to hear the case of the respondents/writ petitioners relating to suspension of their license - principles of natural justice - HELD THAT - There are two views, which are possible in the matter. The first view is that if both the officers are one and the same person, it may give an impression that the officer may be judging his own cause while considering the correctness of the submission made by the respondent/writ petitioner in the post-decisional hearing offered to them upon suspension of the customs broker license. The second view which is possible that if both the officers are one and same person and if he is discharging duties under two different and distinct capacity under two enactments whether it can be termed that he will be judging his own cause, this controversy need not be gone into for the simple reason that the post-decisional hearing should be an effective hearing and the principles of natural justice have to be followed and any iota of bias or prejudice should not surface in the decision making process. The learned writ Court has not laid down legal principles and in the light of the grounds raised by the Department, we are of the considered view to leave the legal issues open while affirming the penultimate direction issued by the learned Single Bench directing the some other authority to conduct the enquiry pursuant to the post-decisional notice issued to the respondent. The appeal stands dismissed and consequently the connected application also stands dismissed.

Summary

Issues involved:
The issue in this case revolves around the appointment of an officer to hear a case related to the suspension of a customs broker's license, where the same authority who issued the post-decisional hearing notice is also the one who drew the offense report against the broker.

Judgment Details:

Issue 1: Appointment of Another Officer
The High Court, in an intra-Court appeal, upheld the order directing the Chief Principal Chief Commissioner of Customs to appoint a different officer of the same rank to adjudicate the case concerning the suspension of the customs broker's license. The Court emphasized the importance of ensuring an effective and unbiased post-decisional hearing, in line with principles of natural justice, to avoid any perception of bias or prejudice in the decision-making process.

Issue 2: Legal Principles and Departmental Grounds
While acknowledging the two possible views on the matter, the Court declined to delve into the controversy of whether the same officer holding distinct capacities under different enactments would be judging his own cause. The Court agreed with the Single Judge's decision but clarified that the order did not establish a legal principle. The Department raised concerns that implementing the order could render all orders against the customs broker null and void, potentially disrupting departmental functioning. The Court, however, did not examine these issues in the appeal, leaving the legal matters open while affirming the direction to appoint a different authority for the enquiry.

Conclusion and Additional Directions
The Court dismissed the appeal and extended the time for compliance with the Single Bench's directions by 30 days. It clarified that the time extension would not prejudice the respondent, who had already filed a separate writ petition challenging the suspension of the license. The Court emphasized that the order in the writ petition should not be considered a precedent since the legal issues remained open. No costs were awarded, and the Court directed the delivery of a certified copy of the order to the advocates upon completion of formalities.

This summary provides a detailed overview of the judgment, highlighting the key issues, the Court's reasoning, and the final decision rendered by the High Court of Calcutta.