Mandatory notice before customs agent suspension remains required despite emergency suspension power under the licensing regulations.

An emergency suspension power under the CHA Licensing Regulations does not dispense with the separate mandatory notice procedure before adverse action is taken. The regulatory scheme was treated as self-contained, and the urgent power under Regulation 21(2) could not override the notice requirement in Regulation 23(1) where the suspension carried grave civil consequences. Because no notice was issued, the suspension was held to breach natural justice and could not stand. The commentary further states that, unless the statute clearly excludes hearing rights, quasi-judicial authorities must disclose the case against the affected person and afford an opportunity to respond before suspension.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the Commissioner could suspend a Customs House Agent licence under Regulation 21(2) of the CHA Licensing Regulations, 1984 without issuing notice under Regulation 23(1); (ii) Whether the impugned suspension order was vitiated for breach of natural justice.

Issue (i): Whether the Commissioner could suspend a Customs House Agent licence under Regulation 21(2) of the CHA Licensing Regulations, 1984 without issuing notice under Regulation 23(1).

Analysis: Regulation 21(2) permits immediate suspension in appropriate cases where urgent action is necessary, but it does not expressly dispense with the mandatory notice requirement contained in Regulation 23. The regulatory scheme is self-contained and contemplates a procedure leading to suspension or revocation. The urgent power under Regulation 21(2) may relax some steps, but not the foundational requirement of notice before adverse action that has grave civil consequences.

Conclusion: The power under Regulation 21(2) does not authorise suspension without compliance with Regulation 23(1); the notice requirement remains mandatory.

Issue (ii): Whether the impugned suspension order was vitiated for breach of natural justice.

Analysis: Even where a statute is silent or confers emergency power, a quasi-judicial authority must ordinarily disclose the case against the affected person and afford an opportunity of hearing, unless the statute clearly excludes that requirement. As no notice was issued before suspension, the order suffered from breach of natural justice and could not stand.

Conclusion: The suspension order was invalid and liable to be set aside.

Final Conclusion: The appeal succeeded, the suspension order was quashed, and the matter was sent back for fresh action after notice and further procedure in accordance with the Regulations.

Ratio Decidendi: An express emergency suspension power under a regulatory scheme does not dispense with a mandatory notice provision unless the statute clearly and specifically excludes it; where adverse action entails grave civil consequences, notice remains obligatory.

---