(1.) By consent the appeal placed on Board for hearing and final disposal.
(2.) Same appearances.
(3.) This appeal is directed against an order of a learned Single Judge summarily dismissing the Writ Petition No. 2943 of 1986 on the ground that there was no reason why the petitioners (appellants) should not have availed of the alternative remedy. In our view, this order is not unstainable. The admitted facts show that the appellants imported a horizontal high speed ban saw for allow steel with cutting speed upto 120 metres per minute. According to the appellants, this item was covered under the O.G.L. by reason of Entry 94 of Appendix I Part 'B' of the Import Policy for April, 1985 to March, 1988. The said Entry runs as follows :