Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Sudhir Kumar Singh vs Commissioner Of Customs (Port) on 30 May, 2019
Author: Protik Prakash Banerjee
Bench: Protik Prakash Banerjee
1
(VB)
30.5.2019
Item No.3
Ct. No.37
Sg/G.S.Das
W. P. 9614(W) of 2019
Sudhir Kumar Singh
Vs
Commissioner of Customs (Port), Kolkata & Ors.
Mr. Mainak Bose,
Mr. Shakeel Mohammed Akhter,
....for the Petitioner.
This is a writ petition which was attempted to be moved
on service. I am told that the service was effected on the
Respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 3 and the Affidavit-of-Service is in
the process of being affirmed. Despite the aforesaid, none has appeared for the Respondent Authorities.
The present writ petitioner seeks a direction on the Respondent Authorities to amend the Import General Manifests in respect of certain perishable goods. The case made out in paragraph 21 of the writ petition is that if any delay is caused then the quality of the goods in question may be affected and it may be rendered and unfit for human consumption. Therefore, this is a case where there is more urgency and I have to take up the matter today, since any delay would defeat the purpose for which not merely the interim order but the final order has been prayed for.
The case of the petitioner is that he is the subsequent purchaser of seven consignments of "Russian Whole Yellow Peas". The original Import General Manifests was filed by the shipping lines stating the name of the third respondent as importer. Thereafter, the respective shipping lines made applications and/or written representations to the 2 Respondent No.1 for amendment of the original Import General Manifests which appears from page 99 of the writ petition. However, the respondent no.2 directed the shipping lines of the petitioner to obtain a No Objection Certificate from the Respondent No.3 for amendment of the Import General Manifests. The supply is being made by the foreign supplier. It is not in dispute that the petitioner is the subsequent purchaser. The petitioner does not claim without obtain the said goods without payment of demurrage or the statutory dues, if any. I do not appreciate that for what good reasons the No Objection Certificate from the respondent No.3 was sought.
At any rate, the third respondent is before the Court and it has chosen not to appear. This should show that it has no objection to the said amendment and by conduct waived the necessity to give a no objection.
Unfortunately, on the first day of hearing of the writ petition, I cannot grant the final relief but since a prima facie case has been made out as above I stay the operation of the communications dated May 2, 2019 and May 20, 2019 and direct the Custom Authorities to allow the petitioner to take delivery of the "Russian Whole Yellow Peas" on furnishing an undertaking that they will pay for summons as a lawful as due to them under statute or statutory regulations and circulars to the Respondent Authorities subject to the result and after the disposal of the writ petition. The said exercise shall be completed within the seven days from the date the undertaking has been furnished. Needless to mention, the delivery shall be given and the undertaking shall be received 3 by the Custom Authorities without prejudice to the respondents' rights and contentions.
Mr. Bose, Learned Advocate is given liberty to file Affidavit-of-Service in the course of this day. The Custom Authorities shall act on the communication of the learned Advocate on record for the petitioner without insisting on a duly certified copy of this order.
The question of whether a no objection is still relevant shall be considered at the time of final disposal of the writ petition by way of an abundant caution.
Let the matter appear before the Regular Bench two weeks after reopening subject to the convenience of the Regular Bench.
(PROTIK PRAKASH BANERJEE, J.)