Great Offshore Limited vs Chairman,Central Board Of Excise ...
2011 Latest Caselaw 2596 Del

$~5.
*    IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI


+       W.P.(C) 8517/2008

                                           Date of order: 13th May, 2011


        GREAT OFFSHORE LIMITED             ..... Petitioner
                    Through Mr. Thomas P. Kuruvilla,
                    Advocate.

                         versus

        CHAIRMAN,CENTRAL BOARD OF EXCISE & CUSTOMS
        & ORS.                             ..... Respondents
                    Through Mr. Mukesh Anand, Mr. R.C. S.
                    Bhadoria & Mr. Shailesh Tiwari,
                    Advocates.

         CORAM:
         HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
         HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA

1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
2. To be referred to the Reporter or not ?
3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest ?

SANJIV KHANNA, J.:


        On 7th February, 2011, it was stated on behalf of the

petitioner that they would only like to press prayer (d) in the writ

petition. The said prayer reads as under:

                "(d) For a Writ of Prohibition or a Writ in
                the nature of Prohibition, such other order
                or direction, directing the 1st and 2nd
                Respondents      that    all   adjudication
                proceedings, if any required, against the

W.P. (C) No. 8517/2008                                              Page 1 of 3
                 Petitioners in relation to the vessels in
                Annexure-F be commenced, conducted
                and concluded in any one jurisdiction all
                together, to ensure that there are no
                divergent orders."


2.      The Standing Counsel for the Central Excise and Customs

was required to obtain instructions and the matter was directed

to be listed on 1st March, 2011.            At the request of the

respondent, the matter was adjourned on 1st March, 2011 to 13th

May, 2011.

3.      Today, learned counsel for the respondent has produced

before us letter dated 24th March, 2011. The relevant portion of

the said letter reads as under:

                "     Please refer to your letter dated
                1.3.2011 on the captioned subject.

                2.    The matter has been examined. This
                is to state that the department has been
                issuing Notification/Order under Sub-section
                (1) of the Section 4 and Sub-section (1) of
                Section 5 of the Customs Act, 1962 to
                appoint an officer of Customs to act as a
                common adjudicating authority to exercise
                the powers and discharge the duties
                conferred or imposed on the officer for the
                purpose of adjudicating matters relating to
                Show Cause Notice issued by the concerned
                Commissionerates/Sponsoring       Authorities
                on the basis of their recommendation to
                appoint a common adjudicating authority. In
                the instant case a request from Petitioner
                has been received by the Board on the
                subject. The request is under examination."

W.P. (C) No. 8517/2008                                      Page 2 of 3
 4.      In view of the aforesaid position, the writ petition is

disposed of with the direction to the respondent to decide the

request of the petitioner within a period of six weeks from the

date copy of this order is communicated. In case of an adverse

decision, it will be open to the petitioner to revive the present writ

petition.


                                            SANJIV KHANNA, J.

CHIEF JUSTICE

MAY 13, 2011 VKR