TMI Blog2005 (7) TMI 110X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ations. 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 Regula ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... th favour by the Federation. The Petitioners had successfully appeared in the Examinations conducted by the Respondents from 1995 to 2003. Although the Regulations mandate that the Respondents should take necessary steps for the issuance of licenses to eligible persons on an annual basis, this has not been done since 1995. 5. After inordinate and unexplained delay, steps were taken in the required direction as late as in June, 2003 in terms of Public Notice No. 25/2003 issued by the Commissioner of Customs (Import and General), New Delhi. This Public Notice invited applications for temporary Customs House Agents license under the 1984 Regulation. The Petitioners applied in consequence of this Public Notice in July, 2003. No action was taken in respect of these applications within that year. The Respondents have reacted as late as in March, 2005, that is, after the filing of these Petitions in July, 2004. The letter dated 3-3-2005 reads as follows :- Public Notice No. 06/2005, Dated : 24 February, 2005 Subject : Invitation of applications for grant of temporary Custom House Agents under CHA Licensing Regulations, 1984, C/Reg. Attention of the trade and all public is invited to Publi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is issued without prejudice to the contentions raised by the petitioners in the writ petition No. W.P.(C) No. 2919/2003 in M/s. Transair International v. UOI others and CM. No. 7673/2003 under CWP No. 2137/2002 in M/s. Eminent Cargo v. UOI already disposed of by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court and writ petition Nos. 12808-73/2004 in Sunil Kohli and others v. UOI still pending for disposal before the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi. Sd/- (Suman Nayar) Commissioner 6. In December, 2003 the Respondents had informed the public that pursuant to the recommendations of the High Powered Committee on Reduction of Transaction Costs of Indian Exports and the recommendations of the Kelkar Committee on Indirect Taxes, the Board has initiated the process of making amendments to the CHALR, 1984. The public was further informed that because of these reasons the Board desired that the process of fresh recruitment of Customs House Agents be kept in abeyance till the time the new regulations are notified. Learned Counsel for the Respondent submits that the action articulated in the letter dated 3-3-2005 is a natural sequel to the letter dated 8-12-2003. 7. The question that arises is whether the Pet ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... : 1. Whether a decision-making authority exceeded its powers? 2. Committed an error of law, 3. Committed a breach of the rules of natural justice, 4. Reached a decision which no reasonable tribunal would have reached or, 5. abused its powers. Therefore, it is not for the court to determine whether a particular policy or particular decision taken in the fulfillment of that policy is fair. It is only concerned with the manner in which those decisions have been taken. The extent of the duty to act fairly will vary from case to case. Shortly put, the grounds upon which an administrative action is subject to control by judicial review can be classified as under : (i) Illegality : This means the decision-maker must understand correctly the law that regulates his decision-making power and must given effect to it. (ii) Irrationality, namely, Wednesbury unreasonableness. (iii) Procedural impropriety. The above are only the broad grounds but it does not rule out addition of further grounds in course of time. As a matter of fact in R. v. Secretary of State for the Home Department, Ex Brind, Lord Diplock refers specifically to one development, namely, the possible recognition of the principle ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 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 license 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. 12. The interesting question which remains is which license should be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
