CHA licence suspension under Regulation 21(2) fails when the alleged factual grounds no longer survive.

Suspension of a CHA licence under Regulation 21(2) could not be sustained where the factual basis for each relied-upon ground had failed. The alleged operation under another person's CHA licence had already been set aside, the finding on diversion of duty-free goods under the DEEC scheme had been interfered with in remand proceedings, and the narcotics allegation could not survive after acquittal in the criminal case. With no surviving foundation for continuation of the suspension, the order was held unsustainable and the CHA licence was restored.

---

---

Issues: Whether the suspension of the CHA licence under Regulation 21(2) of the Custom House Agents Licensing Regulations, 1984 could be sustained on the grounds of alleged operation under another person's CHA licence, alleged diversion of duty free goods under the DEEC scheme, and alleged involvement in a narcotics case.

Analysis: The earlier suspension on the first ground had already been set aside, and the earlier finding relating to diversion of duty free goods had also been interfered with in remand proceedings. The third ground could not survive because the criminal charges in the narcotics case had ended in acquittal. In view of these developments, none of the grounds relied upon for the impugned suspension remained available to justify continuation of the action under Regulation 21(2).

Conclusion: The suspension order was unsustainable and was set aside, with restoration of the CHA licence to the appellants.

Ratio Decidendi: A suspension of CHA licence under Regulation 21(2) cannot be maintained when the factual foundations for the stated grounds have already been negated or have ceased to exist.

---