DHAR CEMENT LTD Vs. CCE A

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The basic and foremost grievance of the petitioner is that against the order passed by respondent No. 2 on 26. 2. 1997, petitioner has preferred an appeal before respondent No. 1 in the month of April, 1997 but the said appeal has not yet been taken up for hearing. His further submission is that along with the said appeal, he has also submitted an application under Section 35 (f) of the Central Excise Act for stay, but this application has also not been taken up for hearing.

(2.) SHRI B. G. Neema, appearing for respondents, on advance copy, submitted that till recently there was no Presiding Officer, posted as Commissioner (Appeals), but now an officer has been posted who is taking up the appeals regularly. His contention is that petitioner's appeal is also likely to be taken up for hearing shortly.

(3.) HOWEVER, Shri Upadhyaya submitted that in spite of the fact that Us is pending, respondent No. 2 is making hectic steps to recover the amount under appeal.