TMI Blog2001 (7) TMI 394X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... possession of the goods and the value of the goods seized by the authorities on the information furnished by the petitioners 2 to 6 was Rs. 4,62,700/-. All the petitioners claimed to the second respondent by letter dated 21-2-1988. 20% value of the goods as reward as per the Government order. There was no response to the said letter and hence the petitioners sent a reminder on 23-5-1988 and the said reminder was also not responded. Therefore, the petitioners filed W.P. No. 8985/1989 for a direction to the respondents to pay 20% of the value of the goods seized as reward amount i.e. Rs. 92,540/-. However the said writ petition was dismissed. Aggrieved by the same petitioners preferred Writ Appeal 1051/1989 and by order dated 18-1-1990 a Div ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... petitioners, para, 3.1.1 of the Government Order F. No. 13011/3/85-Ad-V. Government of India, Ministry of Finance (Department of Revenue), New Delhi dated 30-3-1985 states that the informers and Government Servants will be eligible for rewards up to 20% of the estimated market value of the contraband goods seized. As per para 3.5.1 the informers and the Government Servants will be eligible for reward up to 20% of the amount involved in confiscation and when in addition to confiscation of without confiscation a penalty is imposed and realised, 20% of it may also be taken into account in computing the ceiling. According to the petitioners, the value of the contraband seized was Rs. 4,62,700/- and 20% of the reward amount would be Rs. 92,540/- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ounter affidavit that the reward is extraordinary payment which is subject to the guidelines may be granted in the absolute discretion of the authority competent to grant reward and cannot be claimed by any one as a matter of right. In determining the reward, which may be granted by the authority competent to grant reward will keep in mind the specificity and accuracy of the information, the risk and trouble undertaken and the extent and nature of the help rendered by the informer. On consideration of the entire facts, the respondents arrived at a sum of Rs. 5,000/- to each of the petitioners 2 to 6 in total a sum of Rs. 25,000/-. In so far as the first petitioner is concerned, it is stated that he is not the informant and therefore, he can ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... recommend appropriate revision as and when warranted to the Ministry. Reward for detection of other offences under the Customs Act, such as, evasion of Customs duty, under/over invoicing of imports/exports, infringement of import/export licencing laws etc. (Other than those relating to Smuggling matters). 3.2.1 Informers and Government Servants will be eligible for reward upto 20% of the duty, if any, sought to be evaded plus 20% of the fine and penalty levied/imposed and realised provided the amount does not exceed 20% of the market value of the goods involved. 3.5.1 Informers and Government Servants will be eligible for reward upto 20% of the amount involved in confiscation. When in addition to confiscation or without confiscation a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aken, the extent and the nature of the help rendered by the informer, whether information gives clues to persons involved in smuggling or their associaties etc. The risk involved for the Government servants in working out the case, the difficulty in securing the information, the extent to which the vigilance of the staff led to the seizure, special initiative, efforts and ingenuity displayed etc. and whether besides the seizure of contraband goods, the owners/organizers/financiers/ racketeers as well as the carriers, have been apprehended or not. When the seizure is made by the officials on information given by the informers, the risk factor undertaken by the informer has to be necessarily taken into account. Correspondingly the extent to w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ers 2 to 6 as against the sum of Rs. 92,540/-. The risk factor undertaken by the petitioners 2 to 6 and the difficulties experienced by the officials in securing such information and also in seizing the contraband, have not at all been considered by the second respondent. Therefore I have no option but to accept the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the impugned order is a non-speaking order and the same has been passed without application of mind in arriving the quantum of Rs. 25,000/- to petitioners 2 to 6 (Rs. 5,000/- to each of the petitioners 2 to 6) as against a sum of Rs. 92,540/- when once it has been held that the petitioners 2 to 6 are informers, it must be necessarily be held that the petitioners 2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
