9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (10) TMI 2145X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to the petitioner. We refrain from imposing personal costs. The respondent No.1 – Union of India / Central Government is free to recover the costs from either the then Director General of Foreign Trade or the Joint Director then functioning for the lapses on their part in complying with the orders and directions of this Court and thereafter creating difficulties for the Union of India/ Central Government. - Petition disposed of. - WRIT PETITION NO. 1530 OF 2014 - - - Dated:- 30-7-2015 - S.C. Dharmadhikari G.S. Kulkarni, JJ. Mr. J.J. Bhatt, senior counsel with Mr.J.H. Motwani and Mr. Gopal and Mundra i/b Economic Laws Practice : For the Petitioner. Mr. Pradeep S. Jetly with Mr. Dhanesh R. Shah : For the Respondents. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bhash Singh reported in AIR 1997 SC 1390. The Supreme Court held as under : 3. The Constitution of India is the supreme law of the land, having flown from ''We, the people of India, i.e., Bharat, having solemnly resolved to constitute India into a sovereign, socialist, secular democratic Republic. The sovereign power is distributed among the Legislature, the Executive and the Judiciary with checks and balances but not in water-tight rigid mould. In our democracy governed by the rule of law, the Judiciary has expressly been entrusted with the power of judicial reviews as sentinal in qui vive. Basically judicial review of administrative actions as also of legislation is exercised against the action of the State. Since the State o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he officers and presumptive evidence of regularity of official acts done or performed, is apposite in faithful discharge of duties to elongate public purpose and to be in accordance with the procedure prescribed. It is now settled legal position that the bureaucracy is also accountable for the acts done in accordance with the rules when judicial review is called to be exercised by the Courts. The hierarchical responsibility for the decision is their in-built discipline. But the Head of the Department/designated officer is ultimately responsible and accountable to the Court for the result of the action done or decision taken. Despite this, if there is any special circumstance absolving him of the accountability or if someone else is responsi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as constrained to impose the costs personally against him for non-compliance of the order. 5. It is true and we are alive to the fact that when the officer is to take steps as per the decision, some delay may occasion and generally the Courts would be reluctant to impose costs personally against the officers. But the officers are required to go to the Court, give the appropriate explanation and satisfy the Court that they were prevented by circumstances for non-compliance within the time specified by the Court. It is equally salutary to note that if the High Court feels it necessary to impose costs personally against the officers, the Court is required to enquire after giving notice and reasonable opportunity to the officer who could ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the circumstances, we do not think that it is a fit case of interference. 4. Faced with this difficulty, Mr. Jetly would seek an extension of four weeks today and much after 30th June, 2014 to take an appropriate decision and in accordance with law. He submits that as a last chance this time be granted. 5. We do not countenance such state of affairs and particularly from the Directorate of Foreign Trade, the Director General of Foreign Trade or the Joint Director of Foreign Trade having his office at Mumbai. In the circumstances, we grant the time prayed but on the condition that the respondents shall pay costs, quantified at ₹ 1 lakh within four weeks from today to the petitioner. We refrain from imposing personal costs. Th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
