ZOOM INTERNATIONAL Vs. COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Writ Petition has been filed by petitioner seeking a Mandamus for the release of consignments under 5 Bills of Entry ONEYYGNU06619500 dtd. 24/12/2018, YGNCB18002082 dtd. 26/12/2018, Nos. KFMO0900945S dtd. 30/12/2018, KFMO0900948S dtd. 30/12/2018 and KFMO0900953S dtd. 19/1/2019 covered under Contract No. VM/06/07/2017 dtd. 24/7/2017 and No. SC-592 dtd. 6/7/2017 and further consequently direct the Respondents to issue a Detention Certificate for waiver of Demurrage and Container Detention charges in terms of Regulations 6(1)(1) of Handling of cargo in customs Areas Regulations, 2009.

(2.) The identical issue as arising in these Writ Petitions has been considered by me vide my order dtd. 27/2/2019 in W.P. No. 4403 of 2019 (batch) in the case of M/s. Royal Impex v. Commissioner of Customs. The aforesaid order is applicable to the present cases on all fours. The entire order is extracted herein for the sake of clarity:

(3.) Mr. G. Rajagopalan, learned Assistant Solicitor General intervenes in the matter to urge that the Director General of Foreign Trade (DGFT), the entity that has issued certain relevant Notifications, be made a party to the Writ Petitions. However, since the Writ Petitioners seek only a mandamus and do not challenge the Notifications itself, I do not believe that the DGFT is a necessary party to the proceedings. In fact, these very petitioners before me have challenged Notification dtd. 25/4/2018 by way of Writ Petitions in W.P. Nos. 15921 to 15924 of 2018; Notification dtd. 2/7/2018 in W.P.Nos.17387 to 17391, 19684 and 18840 of 2018; Notifications dtd. 5/8/2017, 21/8/2017 and 4/5/2018 in W.P. Nos. 21454, 21455 and 26486 of 2018 and Notification dtd. 28/9/2018 in W.P. Nos. 26440 and 26433 of 2018 wherein the DGFT has, rightly, been made a party.