Delhi High Court
Shahbudeen P. vs Union Of India & Ors on 8 February, 2016
Author: Manmohan
54
$~
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(C) 818/2016
SHAHBUDEEN P. ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. A.K. Nigam, Advocate with
Mr. G.P. Singh, Advocate.
versus
UNION OF INDIA & ORS ..... Respondents
Through: Ms. Monika Arora, Advocate with
Ms. Nidhi Mohan Parashar and
Ms. Anumita Chandra, Advocates
for respondents No.1 to 3.
% Date of Decision: 08th February, 2016.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN
JUDGMENT
MANMOHAN, J: (Oral)
CM Appl. 3607/2016 (exemption) in W.P.(C) 818/2016
Allowed, subject to just exceptions.
W.P.(C) 818/2016
1. Present writ petition has been filed challenging the letter dated 28 th
November, 2015 issued by respondents No.1 to 3 in compliance of judgment
dated 23rd November, 2015 whereby the respondents informed that
petitioner's application for emigration clearance of its workers cannot be
processed unless the petitioner's name is cleared in ongoing investigation
with respect to the case of unauthorised records reported by Tata
Consultancy Services.
2. Learned counsel for petitioner states that the aforesaid letter has not
only adversely affected the scope of earning of the petitioner, but has also
deprived the workers of the petitioner of their fundamental rights to earn
their livelihood as they had obtained permission from the respondents and
are entitled to proceed to their places of work after obtaining emigration
clearance, which is a mere formality.
3. Learned counsel for petitioner also states that the Tata Consultancy
Services is not entitled under the Emigration Act to take any action.
4. However, a perusal of the additional documents filed by the petitioner
reveals that Tata Consultancy Services had complained that certain
recruiting agents had tweaked the Web browser and created unauthorised
records in respect of foreign employers and also raised demands.
5. It is stated by learned counsel for respondent-UOI that Tata
Consultancy Services subsequently deleted around 3500 demands (PTs)
from the system after removing the bug in the system.
6. The additional papers filed by the petitioner also reveal that a criminal
case is pending investigation with the Economic Offences Wing. The letter
written by the Under Secretary to the Government of India to the Project
Director, TCS dated 11th September, 2015 is reproduced hereinbelow:-
" No.1(18)/emigrate/Project Go-Live (part)
Government of India
Ministry of Overseas Indian Affairs
****
Akbar Bhawan, New Delhi
Dated the 11/09/2015
To
Shri Satish Dubey,
Project Director, TCS
eMigrate Project.
Sub: Deletion of demands raised unauthorisedly in eMigrate
system.
Sir,
It has come to our notice that TCS has deleted around 3500
demand (PTs) from the system, which were entered by some RAs
wrongly by taking advantage of some bug in the system. An email
was accordingly sent at 4.13 p.m. to Mr. Awasthi of TCS to
investigate the matter and advise accordingly. No response has been
received. You are requested to investigate the matter thoroughly and
submit a report.
Yours faithfully,
(Bikash R. Mahato)
Under Secretary to the Government of India"
7. Consequently, this Court is of the view that a very serious allegation
of tweaking the web browser has been made by the Tata Consultancy
Services which operates the eMigrate Project for Ministry of Overseas
Indian Affairs.
8. In the opinion of this Court, Section 14 of the Emigration Act, 1983,
which provides for suspension of recording agents is attracted to the facts of
the present case.
9. In any event, this Court is of the view that the precautionary principle
must be adhered to till the investigation is completed inasmuch as 3500
demands placed by the recruiting agents have been found to be fictitious and
were subsequently deleted.
10. Consequently, the petitioner is not entitled to any relief. Accordingly,
present petition is dismissed.
MANMOHAN, J
FEBRUARY 08, 2016
js
