Delhi High Court - Orders
Naman Gupta vs Commissioner Of Customs Airport And ... on 17 November, 2022
Author: Rajiv Shakdher
Bench: Rajiv Shakdher
$~27
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(C) 15808/2022 & CM Nos.49221-22/2022
NAMAN GUPTA ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr Shakeel Aktar, Mr Neeraj Pandey,
Mr Dhriv Surana and Ms Ravina
Sharma, Advs.
versus
COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS
AIRPORT AND GENERAL ..... Respondent
Through: Mr Satish Kumar, Sr Standing
Counsel with Mr Anish Raj and Mr
Dhruv, Advs.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU
ORDER
% 17.11.2022 [Physical Hearing/Hybrid Hearing (as per request)] CM No.49222/2022
1. Allowed, subject to the petitioner filing legible copies of the annexures, at least three days before the next date of hearing W.P.(C) 15808/2022
2. The petitioner is essentially aggrieved by the order dated 29.06.2022 passed under Section 17(7) of the Customs Brokers Licensing Regulations, 2018 [in short "2018 Regulations"]. Via this order, the petitioner's license has been revoked.
W.P.(C) 15808/2022 page 1 of 3 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:ATUL JAIN Signing Date:29.11.2022 20:38:32
3. Inter alia, it is the petitioner's contention that, although, several requests were made for being given an opportunity to cross-examine the witnesses whose statements were relied upon; the requests made have been declined.
4. We may also note that via the impugned order, the petitioner's security deposit has been forfeited and penalty amounting to Rs.50,000/- has been imposed.
5. To our minds, the matter requires examination.
6. Accordingly, issue notice.
6.1. Mr Satish Kumar accepts notice on behalf of the respondent/revenue.
7. Counter-affidavit will be filed within the next four weeks. 7.1 Rejoinder thereto, if any, will be filed before the next date of hearing.
8. Counsel for the parties will also file their written submissions, not exceeding three pages each, at least five days before the next date of hearing.
9. List the matter on 17.03.2023.
CM No.49221/2022 [Application filed on behalf of the petitioner seeking interim relief]
10. This is an application seeking stay of the operation of the impugned order i.e., order dated 29.06.2022, to which reference has been made hereinabove.
11. According to us, no interim direction can be issued. The writ petition has to be decided finally, one way or the other.
W.P.(C) 15808/2022 page 2 of 3 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:ATUL JAIN Signing Date:29.11.2022 20:38:32
12. The application is, accordingly, closed.
13. It is, however, made clear that this will not impact the merits of the case.
RAJIV SHAKDHER, J TARA VITASTA GANJU, J NOVEMBER 17, 2022 aj Click here to check corrigendum, if any W.P.(C) 15808/2022 page 3 of 3 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:ATUL JAIN Signing Date:29.11.2022 20:38:32