Disposed¶16

Enyatullah Safi v. Union of India & Ors.

Delhi HC17 Jan 2025W.P.(C)/13438/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

W.P.(C) 13438/2024; High Court of Delhi; Sachin Datta, J.; 17.01.2025; exit permit; FRRO; clearance certificate/NOC; Office of Commissioner of Customs; penalty Rs.2,00,000/- deposited; O-I-O No 75/ADJ/2017 dated 28.04.2017; paid 20.06.2023; no government dues pending; FRRO to expedite exit permit; petition disposed of.

What did the court decide?

FRRO's statement that the process of issuance of exit permit to the petitioner shall be expedited was taken on record; no other orders passed. ¶16

Enyatullah Safi Vs Union of India & Ors. — Delhi HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

FRRO's statement that the process of issuance of exit permit to the petitioner shall be expedited was taken on record; no other orders passed.

¶16

Issue for consideration

Whether respondent no.2/Office of Commissioner of Customs could be directed to issue a clearance certificate/NOC or other essential document required for issuance of an Exit Permit to the petitioner from the FRRO. +1 more

¶10

Court's answer

The Court proceeded on the recorded position of respondent no.2 that there was no outstanding demand against the petitioner and no impediment or objection from respondent no.2 as regards issuance of exit permit to the petitioner.

¶11

Ratio / Principle

On the material drawn from para 8 of respondent no.2's counter-affidavit, the Department was not in the practice of issuing such NOC/certificate and had no objection to the petitioner leaving the country, the penalty amount having been paid and no government dues remaining pending.

¶14

Key takeaways

Learned counsel for the FRRO stated that the process of issuance of exit permit shall be expedited, and the Court took that statement on record.ratio¶15
No further orders were required to be passed in the petition, which was consequently disposed of.ratio¶16

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Delhi High Court (Sachin Datta, J.), W.P.(C) 13438/2024, order dated 17.01.2025: Petitioner (a foreign national) sought a direction to respondent no.2/Office of Commissioner of Customs to issue a clearance certificate/NOC or other essential document required for issuance of an Exit Permit from respondent no.3/FRRO. Respondent no.2's standing counsel stated there was no outstanding demand against the petitioner and no impediment or objection to issuance of the exit permit, and that no provision/requirement existed for any clearance certificate/NOC from respondent no.2. Para 8 of respondent no.2's counter-affidavit recorded that the petitioner had deposited penalty of Rs.2,00,000/- against O-I-O No 75/ADJ/2017 dated 28.04.2017 on 20.06.2023, that the Department was not in the practice of issuing such NOC/certificate, and that it had no objection to the petitioner leaving the country as the penalty had been paid and no government dues were pending. Counsel for the FRRO stated that the process of issuance of the exit permit shall be expedited; the statement was taken on record. No further orders were required and the petition was disposed of.

¶1

$~22

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- W.P.(C) 13438/2024

¶4

ENYATULLAH SAFI .....Petitioner

¶5

Through: Ms. Seema Singh, Advocate alongwith Petitioner.

¶6

versus

¶7

UNION OF INDIA & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Anurag Ojha, SSC, Mr. Karan Aggarwal, Mr. Subham Kumar, and Mr. Dipak Raj, Advocates. Mr. Padma Kumar for FRRO.

¶8

CORAM:

¶9

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN DATTA O R D E R % 17.01.2025

¶10

The present petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking that respondent no.2/ Office of Commissioner of Customs be directed to issue a clearance Certificate/NOC or any other essential document required for issuance of Exit Permit from the respondent No.3/Foreigners Regional Registration Offices (FRRO).

¶11

The learned standing counsel for the respondent no.2 submits that there is no outstanding demand qua the petitioner nor is there any impediment or objection from the side of respondent no.2 as regards issuance of exit permit to the petitioner.

¶12

He further submits that there is no provision/ requirement for any clearance certificate/NOC from the respondent no. 2. Attention is drawn to Paragraph 8 of the counter-affidavit filed on behalf of the respondent no.2, which reads as under:

¶13

This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 24/01/2025 at 16:28:51

¶14

“8. That it is respectfully submitted that Mr. Safi Enayatullah petitioner has deposited penalty amount of Rs.2,00,000/- against O-I-O No 75/ADJ/2017 dated 28.04.2017 on 20.06.2023. Department is not in a practise of issuing such NOC/ certificate, however, department has no objection if petitioner want to leave the country as penalty amount levied has been paid and no government dues are pending against petitioner.”

¶15

In view of the aforesaid, learned counsel for the FRRO submits that the process of issuance of exit permit shall be expedited. The said statement is taken on record.

¶16

No further order/s are required to be passed in the present petition and the same is consequently disposed of.

¶17

SACHIN DATTA, J

¶18

JANUARY 17, 2025/ at

¶19

This is a digitally signed order.

¶20

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 24/01/2025 at 16:28:51

Enyatullah Safi v. Union of India & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Enyatullah Safi v. Union of India & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Prakash Industries Limited Vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 30, Delhi & Anr.

M/S Royal Security Services Vs Jaipal Singh and Ors.

Fci Handling Workers Union Vs UOI & Anr.

Rajesh Gomes Vs New Delhi Municipal Council (Ndmc) and Ors.

M/S Image Filling Station Vs National Highway Logistics Management Limited & Anr.

Staff Selection Commission & Ors. Vs Atul Baghel

Ethenic Agencies Pvt. Ltd. Vs Mr Kg Somani Erstwhile Liquidator & Ors.

Naib Sub Tej Pal Singh Vs UOI and Ors.

Vdb Whitefield Development Pvt. Ltd. and Ors. Vs Madhusudhan Reddy R and Ors.

P D/O Sh.M Vs Bar Council of India & Ors.

Riyajuddin Vs Delhi Agricultural Marketing Board & Ors.

Uma Goel Vs Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Morgan Securities & Credits Pvt. Ltd. Vs Ganesh Benzoplast Limited & Ors.

Morgan Securities and Credits Pvt. Ltd. Vs Ganesh Benzoplast Limited