2023 (6) TMI 715 - HC - Customs

Court dismisses petition challenging denial of final reward, ruling no legal right exists for claim; evidence lacking for more.

KARTHIKEYAN T.K. Versus THE COMMISIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE &CUSTOMS, THE COMMISSIONER OF THE CENTRAL EXCISE AND CUSTOMS, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA

KARTHIKEYAN T.K. Versus THE COMMISIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE &CUSTOMS, THE COMMISSIONER OF THE CENTRAL EXCISE AND CUSTOMS, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA - TMI Issues involved: Challenge to denial of final reward to petitioner and sanction of maximum limit of final award based on court judgment.Issue 1: Denial of final reward to petitionerThe petitioner, an informant on excise duty evasion, sought a reward as per government guidelines. Despite recovering Rs.85 lakh, the petitioner received only an advance reward of Rs.5 lakh, less than 10%. Following a court direction to reconsider the reward, the respondent found the reward amount to be at the discretion of the committee and Collector of Customs. The petitioner challenged this decision, alleging non-compliance with the court judgment.Issue 2: Sanction of maximum limit of final awardThe respondent contended that the decision to deny further reward was in line with government guidelines and the court judgment. The communication to the petitioner conveyed the decision of the Reward Committee, considering all relevant aspects. The respondent argued that the amount of Rs.5 lakh already paid was adequate and final, with reference to the total reward amount of Rs.17 lakh being for determining the sanctioning authority.Judgment:After considering arguments and the Supreme Court judgment in Union of India v. C. Krishna Reddy, it was held that no legal right exists to claim a reward, as it is an ex gratia payment subject to guidelines and discretion of the competent authority. As there was no statutory duty imposing a legal obligation, a writ of mandamus could not be issued. Without evidence of entitlement to more than the amount already paid, the writ petition was dismissed.