( 1 ) THIS Writ Petition has been filed by the petitioners, who are five in number, with a prayer to call for the file of Union of India represented by the Secretary to Government, Department of revenue, Ministry of Finance and Company Affairs, New Delhi-1st respondent in SO 308 (E), dated 20. 3. 2003 and the consequential proceedings issued by the Commissioner of Customs, Custom house, Chennai-3rd respondent in File Nos. T-4/3-M/95/scn (1), t-4/3-M/95-SCN-II, T-4/4-M/95-SCN-1, and T-4/4-M/95-SCN-II/ comr/exp/enf/15/2003 dated 20-8-2004 and declare the same to be illegal, arbitrary and without jurisdiction.

( 2 ) THE Director of Directorate of Enforcement, New Delhi-2nd respondent registered cases against the petitioners for contravention of Sections 9 (1) (a), 9 ( (1) (b), 9 (1) (d), 9 (3) and 64 (2) of foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 (hereinafter called as fera ). Show cause notices to the petitioners were issued on 22. 2. 1995 followed by call notices on various dates and the latest being 20. 9. 2004 requiring their appearance on 28. 9. 2004 for conduct of personal hearing. It is the contention of the petitioners that FERA has been repealed and in its place Foreign Exchange management Act, 1999 (hereinafter called as FEMA) has been enacted w. e. f. 1. 6. 2000 as notified in GSR 371 (E), dated 1. 5. 2000 and therefore no power is conferred upon any court or any adjudicating officers to take notice of an offence under section 51 of the repealed Act after expiry of two years from the date of commencement of FEMA, nor the Central Government is vested with powers to make appointment of officers. The petitioners also questioned the proceedings dated 20. 3. 2003 issued by Ministry of finance and Company Affairs where under the Central government appointed certain officers as adjudicating officers as contemplated under section 50 r/w 49 (1) of FERA. In nutshell, the contention of the petitioners is that the officers appointed under fera are not recognized under the provisions of FEMA.

( 3 ) RESPONDENTS filed counter affidavit. One R. C. Mathur, Chief enforcement Officer, Directorate of Enforcement, has sworn to the counter affidavit. Counter affidavit of respondents, in brief, is that the Department registered cases against the petitioners and, after conducting necessary investigation, the competent authority i. e. the Special Director of Enforcement issued show cause notices dated 22. 2. 95, 23. 2. 95, 13. 6. 95 and 15. 6. 95 to the petitioners for contraventions of the provisions of FERA. Show cause notices were issued within the time limit prescribed under FEMA, which repealed FERA. The FEMA, which came into force w. e. f. 1. 6. 2000 repealed the FERA and provided a limitation of two years for taking notice of contraventions under the repealed Act by the adjudicating officers as stipulated in Sections 49 (3) and 49 (4) of FEMA. The limitation period expired on 31. 5. 2002. In order to conclude the adjudication proceedings, call notices were issued to the petitioners including the call notice dated 12. 5. 2004 for conduct of personal hearing before the adjudicating officer. The petitioners failed to cooperative with the adjudicating officer in respect of earlier call notices. Had the petitioners co-operated with the adjudicating officers the cases would have been adjudicated long before the FERA being repealed. The notice-dated 20. 8. 2004 is only a call letter intimating the date of personal hearing and it is only a sequel to the show cause notice referred to above. The appointment of adjudicating officers was saved by the provisions of section 49 (4) of FEMA. Sec. 49 (4) of FEMA saves the operation of fera regarding adjudication of cases wherein notices have been taken by the adjudicating officers on or before 31. 5. 2002. Since the cases registered under FERA have to be proceeded under the law and notifications/rules/regulations issued there under, the appointment of adjudicating officers should also be done under that r

Click Here to Read the rest of this document