Customs House Agent licence suspension requires recorded satisfaction of immediate necessity; absence of application of mind invalidates the order.

Suspension of a Customs House Agent licence under Regulation 21(2) is sustainable only where the order itself shows that the authority formed an opinion that immediate action was necessary. The Madras HC held that the impugned suspension did not disclose any consideration by the Collector of this jurisdictional requirement, so there was no indication of application of mind. As the power to suspend pending enquiry depended on that essential precondition, the absence of reasons or disclosure in the order rendered the suspension unsustainable. The suspension order was quashed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the suspension of the Customs House Agent licence under Regulation 21(2) was sustainable in the absence of any indication that the Collector had considered whether immediate action was necessary.

Analysis: Regulation 21(2) permits suspension pending enquiry only where immediate action is necessary. The impugned order did not disclose any consideration or formation of opinion by the Collector on that essential jurisdictional requirement. Since the power could be exercised only on such application of mind, the absence of any indication in the order itself rendered the suspension unsustainable.

Conclusion: The suspension order could not be sustained and was quashed.

Ratio Decidendi: A suspension under Regulation 21(2) is valid only if the order itself shows that the authority applied its mind to the necessity for immediate action.

---