Reasonable time in foreign exchange adjudication bars stale proceedings after decades of unexplained delay.

Continuation of foreign exchange adjudication after an unexplained delay of about 27 to 28 years was impermissible. The Bombay HC held that, although no limitation period was prescribed, statutory powers must still be exercised within a reasonable time; otherwise the proceedings become stale and arbitrary. Because the notices related to alleged acts from 1958, 1966 and 1970, the matter had remained inactive for decades, no satisfactory explanation for the delay was given, and missing records would prejudice the petitioners, the Court quashed the belated proceedings and allowed the petition.

---

---

Issues: Whether adjudication proceedings under the foreign exchange laws could be continued after an unexplained delay of about 27 to 28 years, making the proceedings stale and arbitrary.

Analysis: The petition challenged continuation of adjudication proceedings arising out of show-cause notices issued in 1973-74 in respect of alleged acts of 1958, 1966 and 1970. The Court noted that the matter remained inactive for more than 27 years, that no fault was attributable to the petitioners, that the respondents offered no satisfactory explanation for the delay, and that the absence of relevant records due to the passage of time would seriously prejudice the petitioners. Relying on the principle that even where no limitation is prescribed, statutory powers must be exercised within a reasonable period, the Court held that such belated reopening of old matters could not be permitted.

Conclusion: The continuation of the adjudication proceedings was held impermissible and the petition was allowed.

---