Customs House Agent licence suspension requires early post-decisional hearing; emergent suspension without prior hearing was set aside on the facts.

Suspension of a Customs House Agent licence under Regulation 20(2) may be issued in an emergent situation without prior hearing, but natural justice requires a post-decisional opportunity at the earliest possible stage. On the facts, the majority noted that an earlier suspension on the same facts had already been set aside and that no enquiry had been commenced for a substantial period, so the impugned suspension could not be sustained and was set aside. The dissent would have treated the suspension as reasoned and allowed it to continue until a speaking order was passed after post-decisional hearing.

---

---

Issues: Validity of suspension of the CHA licence under Regulation 20(2) of the Customs House Agents Licensing Regulations, 2004, and whether the suspension could be sustained without a prior hearing and in the absence of an immediate post-decisional enquiry under Regulation 22.

Analysis: The majority held that an order of suspension under Regulation 20(2) may be passed in an emergent situation without pre-decisional hearing, but the principles of natural justice require a post-decisional opportunity at the earliest possible stage. The suspension order was also viewed against the background that the earlier suspension on the same set of facts had already been set aside and that no enquiry had been initiated for a substantial period. On the facts, the majority concluded that the impugned suspension could not be sustained and had to be set aside.

Conclusion: The suspension of the CHA licence was invalid and was set aside.

Dissenting Opinion: The Member (Technical) in dissent held that the Delhi Commissioner could initiate separate proceedings for the Delhi licence, that the suspension order was reasoned, and that the proper course was to direct a post-decisional hearing with continuation of the suspension until a speaking order was passed.

---