RAMNIKLAL SHANKARLAL SHAH Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner seeks to impugn the order-in-original dated 28th October, 1987 passed by the Collector of Central Excise, Bombay II (respondent No. 2) as a consequence of the adjudication proceedings carried out pursuant to the show-cause notice dated 20th February, 1986.

(2.) As a matter of sound discretion, the writ petition is liable to be dismissed on the sole ground of availability of alternative and efficacious remedy of appeal in challenging the order-in-original dated 28th October, 1987 under the Central Excise Act, 1944 . There is nothing extraordinary in the matter that justifies the invocation of extraordinary remedy under Article 226 of the Constitution of India despite the availability of statutory appeal against the order-in- original dated 28th October, 1987. As a matter of fact, the impugned order itself records that an appeal lies with the Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal in terms of Section 35B of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 and that the appeal may be filed within three months from the date of communication of the order. In our view, therefore, the writ petition is liable to be dismissed on this ground alone.

(3.) However, since the writ petition pertains to the year 1988 and remained pending before this court for more than 17 years, we thought it fit to look into the merits of the matter as well.