2016 (7) TMI 1061 - HC - Customs

Court invalidates unsigned order, emphasizes statutory compliance in final orders. Union directed to re-adjudicate.

M/s. M.S. Shoes East Ltd Versus Union of India & Ors.

The court found that the draft order lacking the Joint Secretary's signature was invalid, emphasizing the necessity for statutory compliance in signing ... Validity of draft order passed by the Joint Secretary ('JS') Government of India - Order was not singed by the JS who passed the order - Held that:- As far as present case is concerned, the result is that there is no valid order passed on the Petitioner's revision application till date. The draft order dated 20th August 2002 which has no legal status, cannot be held to be a valid order disposing of the Petitioner's revision application. The said application has to be treated as still pending adjudication and disposal. Resultantly, a direction is issued to the incumbent Joint Secretary in the Department of Revenue to adjudicate and finally dispose of the Petitioner's revision application in accordance with law, within a period of eight weeks from today, without in any manner being influenced by the Draft Order earlier passed. Issues:Challenge to order rejecting revision application under Customs Act, 1962 due to lack of signature by the Joint Secretary.Analysis:The petition challenged an order rejecting a revision application under the Customs Act, 1962, passed by the Joint Secretary. The petitioner contended that the impugned order was not signed by the Joint Secretary. The court noted discrepancies in the original file, where the draft order was signed by the Joint Secretary but lacked a date and had uninitialled corrections. The certified copy of the impugned order provided to the petitioner did not bear the Joint Secretary's signature, raising doubts about its validity.The Union of India was given a final opportunity to produce the original file, which revealed that the impugned order was unsigned by the Joint Secretary. The Union's counsel argued that it was departmental practice to treat draft orders as final orders, but the court disagreed. The court emphasized that statutory requirements mandate the Adjudicating Authority to sign the final order before issuing certified copies to parties. Consequently, the draft order in question was deemed invalid, and the revision application remained pending.The court directed the current Joint Secretary to adjudicate and dispose of the petitioner's revision application within eight weeks, disregarding the previous draft order. Due to the significant delay in resolution, the petitioner was granted a hearing opportunity before the fresh order's issuance. The court stressed the need to end the practice of treating draft orders as final and instructed the Department of Revenue to issue appropriate guidelines promptly.In conclusion, the court disposed of the writ petition, instructing the Joint Secretary to review the revision application within a specified timeframe, ensuring compliance with legal procedures and granting the petitioner a fair hearing opportunity.