SEACOM CARGO PVT LTD Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition was heard along with two other writ petitions being W.P. No. 2870 of 1999 and W.P. 1743 of 2000 since the cause of action in all the three matters are similarly placed. The grievance of the writ petitioners are refusal to consider grant of temporary Customs house agents licence by the Commissioner of Customs (Administration), Calcutta, being Reference No. 45-12/99 Estt. dated 8th September, 1999 under Annexure L' to the first writ petition as follows :

(2.) Petitioners urged a very interesting question of law in respect of the allotment of customs house temporary agent's licence. According to the writ petitioners, Section 146 of the Customs Act, is made provisions for the purpose of giving licence to customs house agents, which is the parent law for the purpose. Section 146 of the Act is as follows :

(3.) According to the petitioners, nowhere under the Clauses of the sub-section 2 it has been prescribed that what would be the actual measure for the purpose of invitation of applications from the willing candidates to have the grant of customs house licence. Therefore, the regulations, if any, made contrary to the parent law is ultra vires . The petitioners have fulfilled all requisite qualifications as per the Clauses of Section 146 of the Act. Therefore, there cannot be any embargo in granting temporary licence. In spite of the same if the authority proceeds on the basis of the Regulations, the same has to be constructed as dehors the law. Introduction of the number of candidates as per the Regulation 4 of the Custom House Agents Licencing Regulations Act, 1984 is a new concept. If the authority concerned is allowed to continue in the manner, then monopoly of the business of the Customs House existing agents will spread over. Of course, this is not an employment but it is definitely a source of employment which cannot be avoided in the manner as prescribed. The petitioners are not scared to get testing their bona fide on being called for an interview as Regulations 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 of the Customs House Agents Licencing Regulations Act, 1984. But the way they have been refused in limine the same is not encourageable at all.