2022 (1) TMI 1260 - HC - Customs

Maintainability of petition - availability of alternative remedy of appeal - HELD THAT - Though the grievance of the petitioners is that the penalty imposed by the Original Authority vide order dated 13.07.2020 bearing reference Denovo Order-in-Original No.87/2020-21- Commissionerate I (F.NO.O.S.No.58/2014-INT-AIR) was modified by Corrigendum Orders dated 15.07.2020 and 20.07.2020, the petitioners in W.P.Nos.5908 5910 of 2021 have already filed appeals and two other petitioners in W.P.Nos.12753 12756 of 2021 have not filed appeal before the Appellate Tribunal. As far as the W.P.Nos.12753 12756 of 2021 are concerned, since the issue would require to be heard along with two other appeals filed by the petitioners in W.P.Nos.5908 5910 of 2021, liberty is granted to the petitioners in W.P.Nos.12753 12756 of 2021 (Gowtham Chakraborthy R.Mahaveer Pipada) to file appeal before the Appellate Tribunal, within a period of thirty (30) days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Petition disposed off.

Summary

Issues involved:
Determining the impact of appeals filed by some petitioners on the dismissal of their petitions, assessing the requirement for other petitioners to file appeals before the Appellate Tribunal, granting liberty to certain petitioners to file appeals within a specified timeframe, and ensuring all appeals are heard and disposed of together.

Analysis:

1. The judgment addresses the situation where certain petitioners had already filed appeals against a penalty imposed by the Original Authority. The Court noted that these petitioners had chosen to pursue their remedy through the Appellate Tribunal. The issue arose when other petitioners had not taken similar action, leading to a need for a final determination on the matter.

2. The Court observed that since some petitioners had already lodged appeals, their petitions (W.P.Nos.5908 & 5910 of 2021) were liable to be dismissed. This decision was based on the fact that these petitioners had initiated the appeal process, indicating their willingness to address the penalty through the Appellate Tribunal.

3. Regarding the remaining petitioners (W.P.Nos.12753 & 12756 of 2021), the Court granted them the liberty to file appeals before the Appellate Tribunal within thirty days from the date of receiving the order. This allowance ensured that all related appeals could be heard together for a comprehensive resolution of the matter.

4. The judgment emphasized that if the additional appeals were submitted within the specified timeframe, they would be entertained by the appellate authority and handled in conjunction with the appeals filed by the initial petitioners. This approach aimed to streamline the adjudication process and ensure a coherent resolution for all parties involved.

5. In conclusion, the Court dismissed the petitions of those who had already filed appeals (W.P.Nos.5908 & 5910 of 2021) while disposing of the petitions of the remaining petitioners (W.P.Nos.12753 & 12756 of 2021) with the provision for filing appeals within the stipulated timeframe. The judgment also specified that there would be no cost incurred and closed all connected Miscellaneous Petitions as a result of the decision-making process.