Law and Practice : Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + HC Customs - 2022 (3) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser
2022 (3) TMI 516 - HC - Customs
Seeking directions to respondents for the issuance of License to petitioner to act as a Custom Broker under Customs Brokers Licensing Regulations, 2013 - consideration of petitioner as par with other selected candidates for the issuance of License to petitioner to act as a Custom Broker - the petitioners are seeking directions be given to the respondents to issue license of Custom Broker under the Custom Broker Licensing Regulation, 2013 - HELD THAT:- There is no dispute that the call letters were issued to the petitioners on April 30, 2019 asking them to appear in the oral examination (on May 23, 2018/May 25, 2018) before the communication dated May 03, 2019 was sent to the Principal Director General, NACIN. On the date of April 30, 2019 when such communication was sent there was no decision that the cut of marks for oral examination was 60 and not 50.
It cannot be disputed the selection process with regard to the petitioner had started under CBLR, 2013 and it is also conceded by Mr. Harpreet Singh that under the CBLR, 2013, a candidate is entitled to appear in oral examination, on two occasions within a span of two years. The petitioners herein did appear in the oral examination, once but had not qualified. The second chance of oral examination in which the petitioners were eligible / entitled to appear, cannot be on different parameters. Otherwise, there would be anomaly, inasmuch as for written examination they were assessed at 50 marks, but for oral examination at 60 marks. Further, the right of consideration on same parameters could not have been taken away.
That apart, it is not the case of the respondents that before the petitioners appeared in the oral examination held on May 23/25, 2019 the petitioners were put to notice that their consideration for oral examination would be on the basis of 60 marks. In the absence of such a notice to the petitioners the criteria could not have been changed. Further, it is not the case of the respondents that petitioners have not achieved 50 marks in the oral examination held on May 23, 2019/May 25, 2019, hence, the petitioners having qualified the written examination on the basis of 50 marks, they have to be assessed at 50 marks in the oral examination, otherwise, it shall have the effect of changing the criteria midway, which is impermissible.
The writ petitions are allowed and disposed of.