9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (9) TMI 328X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Station also - In the absence of prima facie materials to indicate that the petitioner is actively involved in the illegal removal of the seized goods in connivance with the staff or others, or hoodwinking the Customs officials, they shall be construed to be innocent. The impugned order does not disclose as to how the continuance of petitioner will prejudice the proceedings initiated and lacks further details as to the entrustment other seized goods with the petitioner hampering the public interest. The order is in the nature of fixing the petitioner for the lapse with a view to save the skin of the officials of the respondent. The order of interim stay granted by this Court, vide order dated 09.03.2018, is made absolute till the disposal of the proceedings initiated by the respondents in SCN No.01/2018 dated 24.07.2018, on certain conditions - petition disposed off. - W.P(MD)No.5052 of 2018, W.M.P(MD)Nos.5019, 6612 and 7017 of 2018 - - - Dated:- 2-8-2018 - M. Govindaraj, J. For the Petitioner : Mr.N.Prasad For the Respondent : Mr.B.Vijayakarthikeyan ORDER Pursuant to the directions of the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in W.A.(MD) No.673 of 2018 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . 5. This Court while admitting the writ petition granted interim stay of the order. Since no reasons were assigned, the respondents filed a writ appeal and it was remitted to this Court for disposal of vacate stay petition as mentioned in the opening paragraph. 6. The learned Counsel for the petitioner would submit that as per Regulation 11(2) of the Handling of Cargo in Customs Area Regulations, 2009, the Principal Commissioner of Customs/Commissioner of Customs, as the case may be, may in appropriate cases, where immediate action is necessary, suspend the approval granted to the Customs Cargo Service Provider. 7. According to him, this is not an appropriate case for imposing immediate suspension. The Container Freight Station is certified as a best station for the past two consecutive years. More than 500 employees are employed. Insofar as the illegal removal of red sanders is concerned, he has nothing to do with it. It cannot be ascertained as to who has committed this illegal act. As long as there is no prima facie material to involve the petitioner, such stringent action shall not be taken and suspension will amount to imposing of a punishment without enquiry. It wil ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o point out that he is involved, much less, actively involved in the removal of the confiscated goods. 14. The contention of the learned Counsel for the respondent that a security agency has been employed by the petitioner 24X7 and the CCTV cameras are also installed, shows that the Container Freight Station has been diligent in carrying out their business. Moreover, in all Container Freight Stations, there are two Customs officials also available in order to monitor the transactions and in-flow and out-flow of materials as it shall be under surveillance of Customs Department. 15. It is pertinent to note that the pre-trial proceedings under Section 110(1-B) of the Customs Act, 1962, was concluded as early as on 22.05.2014. The pre-trial proceedings were conducted for the purpose of disposal of the seized and confiscated goods. Even though the pre-trial proceedings were concluded on 22.05.2014 and One Time Seal was affixed, it was checked up only when the inspection was conducted on 27.02.2018 for the disposal of the red sanders and in between (22.05.2014 and 27.02.2018), almost four years had elapsed. 16. It is not clear as to when the goods confiscated were removed illega ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed under regulation 12 and also order for forfeiture of security, if any, for failure to comply with any of the provisions of the Act and the rules, regulations, notifications and orders made thereunder; (2) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-regulation (1), the Principal Commissioner of Customs or Commissioner of Customs, as the case may be, may in appropriate cases where immediate action is necessary, suspend the approval granted to a Customs Cargo Service provider where an enquiry against such Customs Cargo service provider is pending or contemplated. 19. In view of Regulation 11(1) of the Regulations extracted above, a show cause notice dated 24.07.2018 has already been issued. Once the penal proceedings are initiated and it culminated in a show cause notice, the interim suspension may no longer be required. On completion of the above said proceedings, the petitioner, if aggrieved, has a remedy of appeal. 20. The learned counsel for the respondent would raise another ground that the writ is not maintainable without exhausting the alternative remedy. In fact, against the suspension issued under Regulation 11(2) of the Regulations, the petitioner can only se ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
