Court Orders Issuance of Custom Broker Licenses Based on Initial Criteria

The court allowed the writ petitions, directing the respondents to issue licenses to the petitioners as Custom Brokers. It held that the petitioners should be assessed based on the 50 marks criteria as initially set out, emphasizing that changing the criteria midway without notice was impermissible. The court found that the retrospective application of CBLR, 2018 was not justified in this case.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Validity of the oral examination result under CBLR, 2013 and CBLR, 2018.
2. Criteria for passing marks in oral examinations.
3. Retrospective application of CBLR, 2018.
4. Right to be assessed under the same parameters as initially set out.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Validity of the oral examination result under CBLR, 2013 and CBLR, 2018:
The petitioners filed writ petitions seeking the issuance of a Custom Broker license under the Customs Brokers Licensing Regulations, 2013 (CBLR, 2013). They argued that they had qualified the written examination and should be assessed under the same criteria for the oral examination as prescribed in CBLR, 2013. The respondents conducted the oral examination under the amended CBLR, 2018, which changed the criteria.

2. Criteria for passing marks in oral examinations:
The petitioners contended that the oral examination should be assessed based on the 50 marks criteria as per the public notice dated July 01, 2011. The respondents, however, applied a new criterion of 60 marks as per a communication dated May 03, 2019. The court noted that the CBLR, 2013 and CBLR, 2018 did not prescribe specific cut-off marks. The change to 60 marks was communicated after the petitioners had already been called for the oral examination, and they were not informed of this new criterion.

3. Retrospective application of CBLR, 2018:
The respondents argued that the CBLR, 2018, which superseded CBLR, 2013, is retrospective in nature and applicable to the petitioners. The court observed that the selection process for the petitioners commenced under CBLR, 2013, and they were entitled to be assessed under the same parameters. The court found that changing the criteria midway without prior notice was impermissible.

4. Right to be assessed under the same parameters as initially set out:
The court emphasized that the petitioners' right to be considered for the second attempt of the oral examination should be on the same parameters as under CBLR, 2013. It was noted that the petitioners were not informed about the change in the cut-off marks to 60 before appearing for the oral examination. The court ruled that the petitioners, having achieved 50 marks in the oral examination, should be assessed under the original criteria.

Conclusion:
The writ petitions were allowed, directing the respondents to issue licenses to the petitioners as Custom Brokers. The court held that the petitioners should be assessed based on the 50 marks criteria as initially set out, and changing the criteria midway without notice was impermissible. The retrospective application of CBLR, 2018 was not justified in this context.

---