S CHAMPALAL Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Writ Petition coming on for orders as to admission on this day upon perusing the petition and the affidavit filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of Mrs. Ramani Natarajan advocate for the petitioner, the Court made the following order: The prayer in the writ petition is for aCertiorarito call for the records relating to the order issued by the Collector of Central Excise dated 25-12-1987 and as modified by the Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal, Madras-17 by its order dated 4-10-1988 and quash the said order.

(2.) THE order of the Collector of Central Excise has merged with the order of the Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal. Section 129 of the Customs Act states that the Central Government shall constitute an Appellate Tribunal to be called the Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal. Section 129A explains the jurisdiction of the said Appellate Tribunal. Section 129B of the Customs Act states that the Tribunal may after giving the parties to the appeal, an opportunity of being heard, pass such orders thereon as it thinks fit. Section 130 states that on an application to the Collector of Customs or the other party within 60 days of the date of service of the notice of the order made under Section 129B and on payment of the requisite fee require the Appellate Tribunal to refer to the High Court any question of law arising out of such order and subject to the other provisions contained in that section. THE Appellate Tribunal shall within 120 days of the receipt of such an application direct a statement of the case and refer it to the High Court. THE proviso to the said section enables the Appellate Tribunal to excuse the delay in presenting the application by an extended period not exceeding 30 days.

(3.) WHEN a specific remedy has been provided under the Act, that procedure should be moved by any aggrieved party. He cannot allow that statutory remedy to be barred by time and approach this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for a remedy. Further, under Section 130C of the Act, when any case has been referred to the High Court under Section 130, it shall be heard by a Bench of not less than two judges of the High Court. Therefore any appeal or other proceedings questioning the validity of the order of the Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal can be heard only by a Bench of two judges. Consequently in exercise writ jurisdiction, a Single Judge of this Court cannot quash the order of the Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal, for the aforesaid reason, this Writ Petition is not maintainable on the facts and in the circumstances of the case.