RAMESH KUMAR AGRAWAL Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ISSUE notice. Copy of the petition has been served in the office of Mr. Sarvesh Jain. Counsel for petitioner submits that self same controversy came to be examined & decided by the Coordinate Bench in DB Civil Writ Petition No. 1891/2013 (Manglam Cement Limited v. The Superintendent, Central Excise Range -III Kota & Ors.) & Other connected petitions vide judgment dated 1 -3 -2013 [ : 2013 (290) E.L.T. 353 (Raj.) : 2013 (30) S.T.R. 225 (Raj.)] and as regards scope of circular dated 1 -1 -2013, observed as under:

(2.) COUNSEL further submits that other connected petition DB Civil Writ Petition No. 2113/2013 (M/s, Bhatia & Company v. Union of India & Ors.) came to be examined & decided by the Court vide order dated 4 -3 -2013 [ : 2013 (293) E.L.T. 485 (Raj.)] in the light of judgment passed by Coordinate Bench, referred to supra and the Court while disposing of the petition (supra) directed the appellate authority/CESTAT to hear and decide the stay application of the petitioner as early as possible but preferably within a period of eight weeks of their appearance before the authority. However, at the same time, the respondents were restrained from taking coercive steps for recovery of the demand during the said period.

(3.) IN the light of the orders (supra), the present petition stands disposed of with direction to the appellate authority/CESTAT to hear and decide the stay application of the petitioners as early as possible but preferably within a period of eight weeks of their appearance. We further direct that in the meantime, no coercive steps for recovery of the demand shall be initiated. The petitioners are directed to appear before the concerned appellate authority/CESTAT where the appeals are pending on 3 -10 -2013 and their presence be recorded in the proceedings.