Proportionality in licence revocation: proved customs agent misconduct upheld, but permanent cancellation reduced to a limited revocation period.

A Custom House Agent licence violation under Regulation 13 was upheld because the licence holder allowed unauthorised persons to operate under the licence, amounting to transfer of the licence. The disciplinary consequence, however, was found disproportionate to the proved misconduct in light of mitigating factors, including no monetary consideration, no revenue loss, and long business standing. Permanent revocation was therefore not maintained in full. The revocation was limited to four years from the Collector's order, after which restoration was permitted subject to a warning against future infringement.

---

---

Issues: Whether the revocation of the Custom House Agent licence for contravention of Regulation 13 of the Custom House Agents Licensing Regulations, 1984 should be sustained in full or modified in view of the mitigating circumstances.

Analysis: The accepted finding was that the licence holder had allowed unauthorised persons to operate under the licence, which amounted to transfer of the licence within Regulation 13. At the same time, the record showed no monetary consideration, no revenue loss, and a long-standing business of about 30 years. The appropriate punishment was therefore assessed with reference to the nature of the proved misconduct and the need for a sanction commensurate with the offence.

Conclusion: The contravention was upheld, but the extreme penalty of permanent revocation was not maintained in full. The licence was directed to remain revoked only for a total period of four years from the Collector's order, after which restoration was permitted subject to a clear warning against future infringement.

Final Conclusion: The decision sustained the finding of breach but reduced the severity of the consequence by limiting the revocation period and permitting restoration thereafter.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a licence violation is established, the disciplinary consequence must be proportionate to the misconduct proved, and mitigating circumstances may justify reduction of a permanent or extreme penalty to a limited-period revocation.

---