Sunita Godara vs Union Of India And Ors.
1991 Latest Caselaw 564 Del

JUDGMENT

B.N. Kirpal, J.

(1) Rule D.B.

(2) The petitioner is an athlete two received invitation for taking part in the marathon which was to be run in Malaysia. The Amateur Athletic Federation of India wrote to the Department of Youth Affairs and Sports, Goverament of India and obtained clearance for the petitioner to participate in the said event. Vide letter dated 28th February, 1991, the Government informed the Honorary Secretary of the said Federation that the Government had no objection to the petitioner representing India in defending her title in 1991.

(3) The petitioner took part in the race on 8th March, 1991 and stood first. It is alleged in the petition that in February, 1991 the organisers of the maratbon bad issued a list of prizes. One of the prizes which was announced was a Mercedes Benz car of a value less than U.S. $ 30,000, The petitioner wrote to the Government on 27th March, 1991 for customs clearance certificate to enable her to import the Mercedes Benz car which she bad won, without payment of Customs duty. On 10th April, 1991, a letter was written from the Department of Youth Affairs and Sports, Ministry of Human Resource Development to the Department of Revenue to the effect that the petitioner had been cleared by the said Department to take part in the event and that she bad produced necessary evidence to show that the prize had been announced prior to the race. Documents were forwarded to the Department of Revenue for giving necessary customs exemption to the petitioner.

(4) The petitioner wrote a number of letters to the Ministry of Human Resource Development but did not receive the necessary exemption certificate. Thereafter the present writ petition has been filed.

(5) Notice to show cause was issued. It was contended by the learned Counsel for the petitioner that if the car is not imported into India, the petitioner will Jose a valuable prize. The respondents were given time, on 6th August, 1991, to file a reply affidavit About a fortnight has elapsed but till today no reply has been filed, It is stated on behalf of the Counsel for respondents 2 and 3 that the Department has given no instructions in the matter. Under these circumstances we have no option but to proceed with the petition without having the benefit of a reply affidavit.

(6) The petitioner is placing reliance on a Notification dated 30th March, 1985 which was issued under Section 20 of the Customs Act, 1962. According to this Notification, the Central Government, being satisfied that it was necessary in the public interest so to do, exempted prizes won by any member of the Indian team which bad participated with the approval of the Government of India, Department of Youth Affairs and Sports in any International tournament or competition, from the whole of the customs duty when the said prize is brought into India. The conditions which bad to be satisfied to be entitled to claim the benefit of this Notification, were that an officer of the rank of Deputy Secretary in the Department of Youth Affairs and Sports should give a certificate to the effect that the importer was a member of the Indian team which had participated with the approval of the said Department in an International competition and bad won a prize in the said tournament and, furthermore, that the said prize had been announced in advance, i.e. before the competition was held. In addition thereto, the importer is required to give an undertaking to the Assistant Collector of Customs at the time and place of importation to the effect that the goods imported shall remain in the possession, control and use of the importer and shall not be sold or parted with for a 'period of five years from the date of the importation.

(7) From the documents on record it is evident that all the aforesaid conditions are satisfied. Infact in the letter of 10th April, 1991 written by the Dy. Secretary to the Government of India, Department of Youth Affairs and Sports, it is clearly stated that the petitioner had been cleared by the said Department to participate in an International competition. The said letter also seems to accept the petitioner's contention that the organisers had announced the prizes at stake in advance of the event. This letter of 10th April, 1991 can, therefore, be regarded, as satisfying the conditions contained in the said Notification of 30th March, 1985 which requires the issuance of a certificate by an officer of not below the rank of a Deputy Secretary. The petitioner has already given an undertaking to the effect that she will retain the possession of the car, which was one of the prizes won by her and she will not part with the possession of the same for a period of five years from the date of importation. The petitioner, in our opinion, on the aforesaid facts, is entitled to the benefit of the said Notification dated 30th March, 1985.

(8) We accordingly issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to issue a customs clearance certificate to the petitioner and further direct them to grant exemption from the payment of customs duty to the petitioner in terms of the Notification dated 30th March, 1985. The customs clearance certificate should be issued within 15 days from today.