UKABHAI MORABHAI TANDEL Vs. COMPETENT AUTHORITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners have instituted the present petition by invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India with a prayer for issuance of a writ , order or direction to quash and set aside the Notice dated 22-9-1988 (Annexure -A) and order passed by the Competent Authority dated 16-3-2001 (Annexure - C) and also the order of the learned Appellate Tribunal dated 6-8-2002 (Annexure - D) intimated vide F. P. A. No. 15/rom/2001/699 dated 13-8-2002.

(2.) THE facts leading to the institution of the present petition, briefly stated, are that the petitioner is a fisherman and agriculturist by birth and he earns his livelihood only from fishing and agricultural work. The petitioner has received a notice from the respondent no. 1 on 22-9-1988 under Section 6 (1) of Smugglers and Foreign Exchange Manipulators ( Forfeiture of Property Act,1976 (SAFEMA on the ground that the petitioner was convicted under Section 135 of the Customs Act on 16-6-1979. It is the case of the petitioner that there was no allegation to the effect that the petitioner was previously convicted in any proceedings under Section 6 (1) of the ("safema" for short) and any other proceedings were initiated or pending or dropped by the competent authority. According to the petitioner, the competent authority had issued notice on 22-11-1979 on the basis of the same incident wherein his brother Kalanbhai Morarbhai Tandel was detained and the petitioner was shown as an affected person vide notice bearing no. CA/ahd/2 (c)/u-14/79-80 dated 22-11-1979. According to the petitioner, the respondent no. 1-competent authority had also mentioned the same allegations as also the property in the notice dated 22-9-1988. According to the petitioner, the notice Annexure "b" was dropped by the respondent no. 1-authority. However, on the same basis and on the basis of conviction under Section 135 of the Customs Act, the respondent no. 1-authority has initiated proceedings on the same subject matter and passed the order on 16-3-2001 forfeiting the properties in question. The petitioner has preferred appeal against the order passed by the respondent no. 1-competent authority before the learned Appellate Tribunal which came to be rejected on 6-8-2002. Hence, the present appeal.

(3.) I have heard the learned Counsel for the parties and gone through the reasons recorded by the competent authority along with the show cause notice.