Back
1996 Supreme(Cal) 207
High Court Of Calcutta
Tarun Chatterjee
EKAM CHEMICAL - Appellant
Versus
COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS - Respondent
Writ Petition 1579 Of 1995
Decided On : 06/04/1996
The central legal point established in the judgment is the mandatory requirement for the Deputy Collector of Customs to provide a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the concerned party before passing a final order under Section 124 of the Customs Act.
Headnote:
Customs Act - Opportunity of Hearing - The court set aside the order of the Deputy Collector of Customs and remitted the case back to him for fresh disposal in accordance with law after giving an opportunity of hearing to the writ petitioner.
Fact of the Case:
The writ petitioner challenged the order passed by the Deputy Collector of Customs, Custom House, Calcutta, under Section 124 of the Customs Act, alleging that the Deputy Collector did not provide a reasonable opportunity of hearing.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the Deputy Collector did not provide a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the writ petitioner before passing the final order, and therefore set aside the impugned order and remitted the case back to the Deputy Collector for fresh disposal.
Issues: The main issue was the failure of the Deputy Collector to provide a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the writ petitioner as mandated under Section 124 of the Customs Act.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the mandatory provision under Section 124 of the Customs Act, which requires the Deputy Collector to give a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the concerned party before passing a final order.
Final Decision: The impugned order was set aside, and the writ application was allowed to the extent indicated above. The Deputy Collector was directed to dispose of the matter as early as possible, preferably within two months from the date of communication of the court's order.
( 1 ) ON a very technical ground this impugned order challenged in this writ application must be set aside. In this writ application the writ petitioner has challenged the order passed by Sri I. Dasgupta, Deputy Collector of Customs, Custom House, Calcutta disposing of the proceedings under Section 124 of the Customs Act. The said order is annexed at Page 90 of the Writ application.
( 2 ) THE only point that has been raised by the learned Counsel for the writ petitioner is that in view of the mandatory provision under Section 124 of the Customs Act, the Deputy Collector had to give a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the Writ petitioner. It appears from the records and also from the affidavit in opposition filed by the Customs Authorities that such opportunity was not given to the writ petitioner before passing a final order against the writ petitioner. Such being the admitted position. I have no other alternative but to set aside the order of the Deputy Collector of Customs, Custom House, and remit this case back to him for fresh disposal in accordance with law after giving an opportunity of hearing in the writ petitioner.
( 3 ) I make it clear that the Deputy Collector of Customs shall intimate the date of hearing of the matter at least a fortnight before such date is fixed. I have not gone into the merits of the disputes raised against the order passed by the Deputy Collector of Customs which would be decided afresh in accordance with law by the Deputy Collector of Customs. The Deputy Collector is directed to dispose of the matter as early as possible preferably within two months from the date of communication of this order. This impugned order is therefore set aside. This writ application is allowed to the extent as indicated above. There will be no order as to costs.
