By TIOL News Service

MUMBAI, FEB 11, 2013: THE Petitioners are a retired Deputy Director of DRI and an informer and they have sought to challenge a decision taken by the Apex Reward Committee of rejecting their claim to the grant of a reward.

The case of the Petitioners is that upon information furnished by the Second Petitioner to the First Petitioner in regard to under valuation of thoroughbred mares/horses imported into India by various stud farms to the extent of Rs.7.00 crores, the information was recorded and action taken to the logical end.

The Petitioners are aggrieved by a communication dated 16 May 2011 intimating them that the Apex Reward Committee consisting of the Chief Commissioner of Customs, the DG, DGCEI & DG, DRI, had at a meeting held on 26 October 2009, declined to accede to the request made by the Petitioners.

The basis on which the Committee rejected the claim of the Petitioners to the grant of a reward has been set out in the communication of 16 May 2011, the relevant part thereof reads:

"3.1 ... ... ... ... The said Committee noted inter alia that the information recorded in the case by Shri P C K Nair, the then Assistant Director, DRI, Mumbai, is undated; no DRI 1 appears to have been prepared and there is no evidence of DRI 1 having been dispatched to DRI headquarters, which is mandatory; the sealed cover said to contain the original information was delivered to the Custodian of the sealed envelope on 2.12.2002, whereas the first note in the case file is recorded, following the receipt of the information on 30.9.2002.

3.2 Noting the procedural lapses, the above Committee concluded inter alia that the claim of information received is suspect; existence of a valid DRI 1 is a fundamental requirement for grant of reward to informer; since there is no DRI 1 record, leave alone a valid one, the Committee is not in a position to consider grant of reward to informer. The proposal was accordingly rejected by the said Apex Committee."

The High Court observed that the grant of a reward by the Union Government to informers is not a matter of right and this principle has been enunciated in the judgment of the Supreme Court in Union of India Vs. C. Krishna Reddy - (2004-TIOL-10-SC-REWARD) .

Noting so, the High Court held -

“4. On the basis of the reasons which have been furnished in the impugned communication, it is evident that the claim of the Petitioners was duly considered by the competent authority. The reasons which weighed with the authority in declining to grant the reward cannot be re-appreciated by substituting the opinion of the Court for that of the authority, which has been vested with the jurisdiction to consider cases for the grant of rewards to informers. The reasons which have been extracted earlier cannot be regarded as being extraneous or suffering from any perversity.”

The petition was accordingly dismissed.

(See 2013-TIOL-110-HC-MUM-CUS)