Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + HC Customs - 2005 (7) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2005 (7) TMI 110 - HC - CustomsCustoms House Agents - Whether the Petitioners had the right to be considered for the issuance of licences under the CHALR, 1984 because they had successfully appeared in the Examinations held under these Regulations prior to the coming into effect of CHALR, 2004 - Wednesbury reasonableness exists - HELD THAT:- The present case is not one where Petitioners have become ineligible for the grant of licences because of changes brought out in the 2004 Regulations. The decision to cancel the invitation for grant of licences by the Public Notice issued in June, 2003, is therefore, not in consonance with Wednesbury reasonableness. A person appears in an examination on the basis of Regulations then in existence with the legitimate expectation that the prevailing Regulation will continue to apply. Such a person has the legitimate expectation for enjoying the fruits of his success in the Examination, which in the present case, would have been the issuance of a temporary licence under the 1984 Regulations. Justifiably and reasonably, the Preamble of the 2004 Regulations save actions or events which have already taken place. There is, therefore, no warrant or justification for the cancellation of the process which had already come to its final and ultimate stage. The communication dated 8-12-2003 is also in line with this approach inasmuch as it states that process of fresh recruitment must be kept in abeyance. I am unable to agree with the case of the Respondent that the Petitioners can be treated as falling within fresh recruitment even though they had already been in the present service for almost two decades and have passed in the Examinations conducted by the Respondent themselves. 'Fresh recruitment' must refer to the process of fresh examinations initiated under 2004 Regulations. Since temporary licences as per the 1984 Regulations are no longer in vogue licences would now be granted under the 2004 Regulations. This is one of the important simplifications brought into effect. In the circumstances of the present case, therefore, the only possibility is for the Respondent to consider the Petitioners as having cleared the Examinations envisaged in the extant Regulation 8 and if the conditions stipulated in Regulations 6 and 9 are met by the Petitioners, to grant them the licences envisaged under the present Regulations. This exercise be completed within ninety days from today. Petitions are allowed in the above terms. Parties shall, however, bear their respective costs.
|