Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the telex restraining the petitioner from operating the advance licence and the consequential refusal to release the imported goods were authorised under the Imports (Control) Order, 1955 and were valid in the absence of a hearing.
Analysis: The power under Clause 8A and the power to suspend operation under Clause 9(3) are interim measures connected with proceedings under Clause 8 or Clause 9, and the scheme of the Order requires observance of natural justice before such prejudicial action is taken. Clause 10 expressly provides for a reasonable opportunity of being heard before action under Clauses 8, 8A and 9 is taken. On the facts, no proceeding under Clause 8 or Clause 9 had been initiated, no show-cause notice had been served, and the respondents did not demonstrate any prima facie satisfaction or lawful source of power for issuing the telex at a pre-investigation stage. The action therefore could not be sustained as an ancillary power exercised in aid of the Order.
Conclusion: The telex was held to be ultra vires the Imports (Control) Order, 1955 and contrary to the principles of natural justice, and the petitioner succeeded.
Ratio Decidendi: An interim restraint affecting an existing import licence under the Imports (Control) Order, 1955 cannot be imposed before initiation of proceedings and without affording a reasonable opportunity of hearing where the statutory scheme requires natural justice.