Customs House Agent prohibition requires disclosed breach, proper regulatory power, and effective notice before action is sustained.

A prohibition order against a Customs House Agent must rest on disclosed material showing the specific breach of the governing obligations and must be issued under the correct regulatory power. A bare allegation without particulars of the dates or evidence relied upon denies effective notice and a meaningful opportunity to respond. Reliance on the wrong regulation, including reference to suspension when no suspension order exists, indicates non-application of mind. On that basis, the impugned order was held illegal and quashed, while leaving the authority free to issue a fresh order in accordance with the proper regulation.

---

---

Issues: Whether the order prohibiting the Customs House Agent from carrying on customs-related activities was sustainable when it did not disclose the material or specific breach on which satisfaction was recorded and was issued under the wrong regulatory power.

Analysis: Regulation 21 empowers the Commissioner of Customs to prohibit a Customs House Agent from working in one or more sections of the Customs Station if satisfied that the agent has not fulfilled the obligations under Regulation 13. Such satisfaction must be based on disclosed material and the order must indicate the relevant breach so that the affected party has a real opportunity to show cause or reply. A bare general allegation, without particulars of the dates or material relied upon, deprives the person affected of effective notice. The communication also referred to Regulation 20, which concerns suspension, although no suspension order had been made, showing non-application of mind.

Conclusion: The impugned order was illegal and was quashed and set aside. The respondents were left at liberty to issue a fresh order in accordance with Regulation 21.

Final Conclusion: The prohibition order could not stand for want of disclosed reasons and proper regulatory foundation, and the writ petition succeeded.

Ratio Decidendi: A prohibition order against a Customs House Agent must be supported by disclosed material showing breach of the governing obligations and must be made under the correct statutory power; otherwise it is vitiated by non-application of mind and denial of an effective opportunity to respond.

---