AYESHA EXPORTS Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. P.K. Shahi, learned senior counsel representing the petitioner assisted by Mr. Santosh Kumar Singh, learned Advocate on Record and Mr. S.D. Sanjay, learned Additional Solicitor General representing the Union of India assisted by Ms. Priya Gupta, learned Advocate and Mr. Alok Kumar Agarwal, learned Advocate.

(2.) This writ application has been preferred Patna High Court CWJC No.7589 of 2018 dt.24/1/2019 for quashing of the order dtd. 30/3/2018 contained in Memo No. 900 dtd. 30/3/2018 passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Land Customs Station, Jobgani, Araria, Bihar (respondent no. 3) by which he has rejected the representation dtd. 3/2/2018 filed by the petitioner and refused to release the Betel Nuts. The petitioner has also prayed for quashing of the seizure report dtd. 30/3/2018 and the test report of Arecanut Research and Development Foundation (in short 'ARDF'), Mangalore on 23/2/2018 on the basis of which the consignment of the petitioner is said to have been put under seizure alleging that the same seems to be of 'Indonesian Origin'.

(3.) Learned senior counsel representing the petitioner has drawn the attention of this court towards the impugned order as contained in Annexure-P/1. It is submitted that even though the narrations of the impugned order at first instance pretends to provide plausible explanation as to why the customs authorities have seized the Betel Nuts in question but a careful perusal thereof would show that what have been narrated Patna High Court CWJC No.7589 of 2018 dt.24/1/2019 in the impugned order are a mere pious wish of the authorities without there being any law to support them in their views.