Minor in Live-In Relationship Deemed 'Child in Need of Care' by High Court, Protection Ordered Under Juvenile Justice Act Cheque Signed, Sealed, and Bounced – No Escape from Liability: Delhi High Court Right to Defend Includes Right to Inspect Documents: Calcutta High Court Overrules Trial Court's Rejection of Inspection Petition Court Cannot Tinker with Finalized Consolidation Scheme Under Section 42: Punjab and Haryana High Court Remarriage During Appeal Period is Risky, But Not Void: Andhra Pradesh High Court State Cannot Sleep Over Its Rights: Supreme Court Criticizes Odisha Government for Delayed Appeals in Pension Dispute “Both Hands Intact” Rule is a Relic of the Past: Supreme Court Grants MBBS Admission to Disabled Student Terminal Benefits and Family Pension Alone Do Not Bar Compassionate Appointment, But Financial Distress Must Be Proven – Supreme Court Cruelty Under Section 498A IPC Is Not Limited to Dowry Harassment: Supreme Court Right to Speedy Trial Cannot Be Defeated by Delay Tactics: Punjab & Haryana High Court Orders Fast-Tracking of Cheque Bounce Case Framing Charges Under Section 193 IPC Without Following Section 340 CrPC is Illegal: Calcutta High Court Doctrine of Part Performance Under Section 53-A TPA Not Applicable Without Proof of Possession: Andhra Pradesh High Court Mere Allegations of False Implication Cannot Override Strong Forensic and Documentary Evidence: Delhi High Court Upholds Conviction in Elderly Woman’s Murder and Robbery Case Applicant Not a Sexual Predator, Relationship Was Consensual: Bombay High Court Grants Bail in POCSO Case Fraudulent Transfers to Evade Creditors Cannot Escape Scrutiny: Punjab & Haryana High Court Restores Execution Petition Gujarat High Court Rules That Contractual Employees Cannot Claim Regularization of Services Serious Charges and Victim’s Suicide Justify Continued Detention: Gauhati High Court Denies Bail in POCSO Case No Permanent Establishment in India, Rejects Notional Income Taxation: Delhi High Court Rules in Favor of Nokia OY Statutory Bail Under NDPS Act Can Be Denied If FSL Report Reaches Court Before Bail Plea": Calcutta High Court Termination After Acquittal is Unjust: Bombay High Court Quashes Dismissal of Shikshan Sevak, Orders 50% Back Wages Denial of MBBS Seat Due to Administrative Lapses is Unacceptable": Andhra Pradesh High Court Awards ₹7 Lakh Compensation to Wronged Student Sessions Court Cannot Reclassify Non-Bailable Offences While Granting Anticipatory Bail: Allahabad High Court

Delhi High Court Orders Grant of Customs Brokers License, Citing "Principle of Equal Treatment"

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Delhi High Court, in its judgment on Writ Petition (Civil) 2143/2023, directed the Directorate General of Performance Management and others to issue a Customs Brokers License to Mr. Keshav Kumar Thakur, the petitioner. The court, led by Hon'ble Mr. Justice Subramonium Prasad, emphasized the "principle of equal treatment" and extended the benefits of a previous judgment to Mr. Thakur without requiring him to approach the court again.

The case revolved around the Customs Brokers Licensing Regulations – 2013 and the criteria for qualifying the written and oral examinations. Mr. Thakur had cleared the written examination with an impressive score of 61.5 marks but initially failed to pass the oral examination. However, he succeeded in his second attempt, securing 51 marks.

The pivotal contention in the case arose when the respondents refused to grant Customs Brokers Licenses to candidates scoring less than 60 marks in the oral examination, alleging a mid-way change in rules. Several other candidates, facing a similar predicament, had previously approached the court through writ petitions (W.P.(C) 12777/2019, W.P.(C) 12865/2019 & W.P.(C) 13132/2019). The court had already allowed these petitions, directing the respondents to issue licenses to the petitioners therein based on the "principle of equal treatment."

"When a citizen aggrieved by the action of a government department has approached the Court and obtained a declaration of law in his favour, others, in like circumstances, should be able to rely on the sense of responsibility of the department concerned and to expect that they will be given the benefit of this declaration without the need to take their grievances to court... Applying this principle to the present case, it was the duty of the Respondents to extend the benefit of the Order dated 18.02.2022 to the Petitioner herein without expecting that every candidate who has secured more than 50 marks in the oral examination must run to this Court to obtain a declaration in their favour."

In light of this principle, the court allowed Mr. Thakur's writ petition and directed the respondents to issue him the Customs Brokers License, taking into account the previous court order that had attained finality.

Date of Decision: 24th July, 2023

Keshav Kumar Thakur vs Directorate General Of Performance Management & Ors     

Similar News