TMI Blog2012 (12) TMI 539X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the necessary certificate granting the Customs House Agents Licence to the petitioner, as per Regulation 9 of the Customs House Agents Licencing Regulations, 2004, on the petitioner complying with the requirements prescribed, under Regulation 10 of the said regulations, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order - writ petition is ordered accordingly. - Writ Petition No.27800 of 2012 - - - Dated:- 1-11-2012 - MR. M. JAICHANDREN J. For petitioner: Mr. P.Saravanan For respondents: Mr. K.Mohanamurali ORDER Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents. 2. It has been stated that the petitioner had appeared ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nai, to issue Customs House Licence to the petitioners therein, who had qualified in the written examination, prior to the coming into force of the regulations issued in the year, 2004. The said petitioners had qualified in the oral examination after the new regulations had come into force. The writ appeal filed against the said order, by the Department of Customs, in W.A.No.1182 of 2011, had been dismissed by this Court, by its order, dated 26.9.2011. 5. It had been further stated that a Division Bench of the Gujarat High Court had quashed the new regulations issued in the year, 2004, by its order, dated 1.10.2010, in Ravindra K.Joshi Vs. Union of India (2011 (267) E.L.T 337 (Guj.). It had been further stated that, in G.Saravanan Vs. U ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... held prior to the coming into force of the new regulations in the year, 2004. 7. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents had placed before this Court a decision of the Division Bench of the High Court of Bombay, reported in THE BOMBAY CUSTOM HOUSE AGENTS ASSOCIATION AND OTHER Vs. THE UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS (2011 TIOL 830 HC MUM CUS). Paragraph 18 of the said order reads as follows: "18. The view which we have taken in regard to the validity of the regulations is consistent with the view taken by a Division Bench of the Madras High Court in C.V. Karunakaran v. Chairman, Central Board of Excise and Customs 2010 (249) E.L.T. 324 (Mad.). The Division Bench of the Madras High Court presided over by Mr.Justice H.L. Go ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he regulations of 2004 every applicant for the grant of a new licence must comply with the regulations which were made in the exercise of the statutory power conferred by Section 146(2). The requirement of passing an examination in additional subjects is based on an intelligible consideration which is to upgrade the skills and competencies of persons who seek to apply for a licence as CHAs. A person who seeks a licence after the enforcement of the Regulation of 2004 must therefore comply with the requirements of the new regulations. For these reasons we are of the view that no case for interference under Article 226 of the Constitution has been made out. The Petition shall accordingly stand dismissed." 8. However, it is noted that a Div ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... grant of such license, as held by this Court, in its earlier orders. 11. The learned counsels appearing on behalf of the respondents had not been in a position to show that the petitioner is ineligible for the grant of the Customs House Agents Licence, as per the new regulations issued in the year, 2004. There is no dispute that the petitioner had passed the written, as well as the oral examination under Regulation 9 of the Customs House Agents Licensing Regulations, 1984, which were existing prior to the coming into force of the new regulations in the year, 2004. 12. In such view of the matter, this Court does not find it appropriate to differ from its earlier view expressed in its decision, dated 1.10.2012 in W.P.No.24210 of 2012, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
