Court directs fair assessment for 'G' Card Licence under Customs Brokers Licensing Regulations

The Court directed the respondent to consider the petitioner's representation for a 'G' Card Licence under Customs Brokers Licensing Regulations, 2013, within eight weeks, emphasizing adherence to examination procedures and avoidance of biased practices. The Court found the oral examination for upgrading from 'H' to 'G' card holders unjustified, noting the absence of provisions in the Rules and potential for bias. The Writ Petition was disposed of without costs, highlighting the importance of fair assessment practices in licensing procedures.

---

---

Issues:
1. Petition seeking 'G' Card Licence under Customs Brokers Licensing Regulations, 2013.
2. Selection process from 'H' card holder to 'G' card holder.
3. Validity of conducting oral examination for upgrading the license.
4. Examination procedures under Customs Brokers Licensing Regulations, 2013 and 2018.

Analysis:

1. The petitioner filed a writ petition seeking a Writ of Mandamus to direct the respondent to consider the petitioner's representation for a 'G' Card Licence under Regulation 17(3) of Customs Brokers Licensing Regulations, 2013, based on a previous court order. The petitioner, holding an 'H' Card license, is a Customs Broker with a minimum educational qualification of 10 + 2, allowing him to transact work at Customs Stations upon producing the identity card when required.

2. The Regulations specify three types of card holders: 'F' card holder, 'G' card holder, and 'H' card holder. To qualify as a 'G' card holder, passing a written examination as per the Regulations is necessary. The petitioner highlighted practices in other port authorities where only written examinations were conducted for upgrading 'H' card holders to 'G' card holders, emphasizing that conducting an oral examination is beyond the authorities' scope.

3. The petitioner passed the written examination but did not qualify in the oral examination, prompting the petition to challenge the oral examination's validity. The respondent's counter affidavit explained that the oral examination aimed to assess knowledge adequacy, following a pattern similar to the F-Card examination until the implementation of CBLR 2018, which prescribed only a written examination for 'G' card holders.

4. The Court noted that the examination was conducted not to upgrade license holders but to reject the upgrade from 'H' to 'G', contrary to the examination's intended purpose. The absence of oral examination provisions in the Rules led the Court to conclude that conducting an oral examination was unjustified. The Court emphasized that oral examinations could introduce bias and questioned the lack of details regarding the nature and assessment of the oral examination in the counter affidavit.

5. Consequently, the Court directed the respondent to consider the petitioner's representation for the 'G' Card Licence under Regulation 17(3) of Customs Brokers Licensing Regulations, 2013, within eight weeks, in line with a previous court order. The Court emphasized the importance of adhering to examination procedures and avoiding biased practices, ultimately disposing of the Writ Petition without imposing any costs.

---