9911796707
|
Home
Issues: Appeal maintainability before the Appellate Board; Legality of Deputy Director's actions in determining appeal competence; Striking down the decision communicated by Deputy Director.
Analysis: 1. The petitioner, engaged in exporting fresh fruits and vegetables, faced legal proceedings under the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1947. Despite being discharged earlier due to lack of criminal complaints, the petitioner received an adjudication order in 1979, holding him guilty of violations. The order allowed for an appeal to be filed within 45 days before the Chairman, Foreign Exchange Regulation Appellate Board. 2. The petitioner claimed to have filed an appeal, but the Deputy Director questioned the timeliness of the appeal. The Deputy Director, invoking Section 23(D)(1) of the Act, stated that the order was not appealable under Section 52, and the reference to an appeal was an error. The Deputy Director extended the opportunity period for compliance, leading to the petitioner challenging the decision through a petition. 3. The petitioner's counsel argued that the Deputy Director's actions were illegal as the Appellate Board should determine the appeal's maintainability, timeliness, and merit. It was emphasized that the authority whose decision is appealed should not unilaterally decide on appeal competence. The Department's counsel acknowledged the flaw in the Deputy Director's order but attempted to justify it based on a previous decision by the Board. The court rejected this argument, emphasizing the need for the Board to hear the petitioner before making a decision. 4. Consequently, the court ruled in favor of the petitioner, striking down the decision communicated by the Deputy Director. The court directed the Deputy Director to await the Appellate Board's decision before proceeding further. No costs were awarded in this case.
|
