Calcutta High Court
Mishra & Mishra (Agencies)Enterprise & ... vs Union Of India & Ors on 30 April, 2009
Author: Soumitra Pal
Bench: Soumitra Pal
WP No. 312 of 2009
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction
ORIGINAL SIDE
MISHRA & MISHRA (AGENCIES)ENTERPRISE & ANR Plaintiff/Petitioner/Applicant
Versus
UNION OF INDIA & ORS Defendant/Respondent
For Plaintiff/Petitioner : MR.RAMESH CHOWDHURY, ADVOCATE For Defendant/Respondent : MR.T.BOSE, ADVOCATE WITH MS.M.BHARGAV,ADV. BEFORE:
The Hon'ble JUSTICE SOUMITRA PAL Date : 30th April, 2009.
The Court : In this writ petition, the petitioner is carrying on business as Customs House Agent at
Kolkata and Mumbai pursuant to the licence issued by the customs authorities at Mumbai and Kolkata have challenged the order dated 21st November, 2008 passed by the Commissioner of Customs (General), Mumbai, Zone-I, Mumbai, respondent no.3 suspending the licence of the petitoner no.1 in exercise of the powers conferred under Regulation 20(2) of the Customs House Agent Licencing Regulations, 2004 on several grounds.
Submission has been made that after the notice of suspension was issued by the Commissioner of Customs, General Mumbai, Zone-I, 2 Mumbai respondent no.3, similar notice of suspension dated 1st December, 2008 was issued by the Commissioner of Customs (Administration), Kolkata which was challenged by filing a writ petition being W.P.No.1804 of 2008 (Mishra & Mishra Agencies Enterprises & Anr. vs. Union of India & Ors). The matter was moved on 14th January, 2009 and after hearing the learned advocates for the parties the impugned notice dated 1st December, 2008 was quashed and the writ petition was allowed.
According to the petitioner, since the issues are similar and as it is evident from the order that the copy of the order of suspension issued by the respondent no.3 was sent to the Commissioner of Customs, Customs House, Kolkata for information and necessary action and as customs authorities are taken as one unit, appropriate orders may be passed quashing the notice of suspension. Submission has also been made that since it is evident from the Establishment Circular dated 17th February, 2009 issued by the Deputy Commissioner of Customs (CHA), Kolkata that the respondents authorities have accepted the order passed on 14th January, 2009 in W.P.No.1804 of 2008, appropriate orders may be passed.
Learned advocate appearing on behalf of the respondents submits that as it is evident from the writ petition that the order passed on 21st November, 2008 by the respondent no.3 is a separate order suspending the licence of the petitioner from 3 carrying on business in Mumbai Customs Zone, no order need be passed.
Heard the learned advocates for the parties. It is evident from the impugned order dated 21st November, 2008 that the order was passed suspending the Customs House Agent Licence of the petitioner from carrying on business in Mumbai Customs Zone. In my view, the order passed on 21st November, 2008 by the respondent no.3 suspending the licence within Mumbai Customs Zone does not fall within the jurisdiction of this court. Therefore, no order is passed on this writ petition. The writ petition is disposed of. However, the petitioner is at liberty to move before the appropriate forum for redressal of his grievances against the order impugned if so advised.
I make it clear that I have not gone into the merits of the case.
Since the writ petition is disposed of at the admission stage without calling for filing of affidavits, the allegations made in the petition are deemed not to have been admitted by them.
No order as to costs.
Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be furnished to the appearing parties on priority basis.
(SOUMITRA PAL, J.) ssaha AR(C.R.)