JUDGMENT- A.V. SAVANT, J.:-The petitioners are a Partnership Firm registered under the Indian Partnership Act, 1932 carrying on the business at Custom House Agents under a licence issued by the Collector of Customs in accordance with the provisions of section 146 of the Customs Act, 1962. They claim to be operating in this field for the last about 40 years without a blemish and during the past 5 years preceeding the filing of the petition, they claim to have annually handled the business involving customs duty of approximately Rs.20 crores each. The first respondent is the Board of Trustees of the Port of Bombay and the 2nd respondent is the Docks Manager of the Bombay Port Trust.

2. By the present petition, the petitioners seek to challenge the letter dated 29th February, 1988 - Exhibit "E" to the petition, under which the 12 Dock Entry Permits issued to the petitioners have been suspended until the final disposal of the criminal case instituted against the petitioners, in the following facts.

3. An incident occured on the 31st January, 1986. M/s. M.G. Wollen Mills, Amritsar, had placed an order with M/s. State Centre Vaste Mills Corporation, California, for supply of woollen and synthetics rags and accordingly, 80 bales, including 37 bales of woollen rags and 43 bales of old synthetics rags, totally weighing 39,932 kgs. were imported and arrived at the Bombay Port Trust (for short, B.P.T.) on or about 8th August, 1985. The petitioners were acting as Custom Clearing Agents on behalf of the said importers M/s. M.G. Woollen Mills, Amritsar. The goods were lying at the Chembur Container Yard of the Bombay Port Trust and the petitioners submitted a Bill of Entry requesting the release of 80 bales for mutilation. Under the textile policy of the Government of India, an importer is entitled to import woollen and synthetics rags in unmutilated condition and after its import, the importer can get the said goods mutilated under the supervision of the Mutilation Team, which team consists of the representatives from the offices of the Textile Commissioner and the Joint Chief Controller of Imports and Exports, Bombay. The petitioners requested the B.P.T. for shifting the 80 bales from the Chembur Container Yard to the H-Warehouse at Cotton Green, Bombay, for the purpose of mutilation and delivery. It is alleged that on shifting the bales from Chembur to Cotton Green, they were put in 9 trucks escorted by one Prakash Nana More, who is a Tally Clerk of the B.P.T. The said trucks were diverted to a Godown at Kurla, where the imported goods were unloaded and the trucks were loaded with another 80 bales of local goods which were to be sent for mutilation to give an impresssion that the imported goods were to be mutilated. The necessary searches were effected in the first week of February, 1986 and the imported goods with the original 80 coverings having marks of imported origin were recovered from the Godown at Kurla. The chargesheet has been filed by the C.B.I. in which accused No.1 Prakash Nana More is the concerned tally clerk of the B.P.T., accused No.2 Iqbal Hussain Habiulla is the owner of the godown at Kurla where 80 bales of imported goods were unloaded and 80 bales of local goods were substituted. The 3rd accused is the petitioner firm represented by Shri Parmanand V. Raut. The other partner of the petitioner firm Smt. Pratibha Raut has not been made the accused. Murlidhar Pandurang Jagdale, the Mutilating Contractor of the B.P.T. is the 4th accused and the employee of the petittioner viz. the concerned Clerk, who was handling the work on behalf of the petitoner viz. Chandrakant Ramraj Shukla, is the 5th accused. The charges are for the offence punishable under section 120-B, read with section 409 and section 420 of the Indian Penal Code, as also under section 5(2) read with section 5(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947. The said Special Case No.55 of 1987 is pending in the Court of the Special Judge, Greater Bombay.

4. In

Click Here to Read the rest of this document