2016 (9) TMI 1122 - HC - Customs

Issuance of writ of mandamus to implement the order passed by the appellate authority - the appellate authority dismissed the appeal filed by the Department and allowed the petitioner s appeal and reduced the redemption fine for re-export from ₹ 2,10,000/- to ₹ 1,50,000/- and did not interfere with the personal penalty - order of appellate authority not implemented by the respondents - revision filed against the order - whether on not granting of order by the Revisional Authority would amount to stay of order passed in the appeal? - Held that - the decision in the case of NVR Forgings v. Union of India 2016 (5) TMI 7 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT is relied upon where it was held that the Revisional Authority has no jurisdiction to entertain the Revision Petition, against an order passed by the Officer, who is in the same cadre. In any event, the order passed by the Appellate Authority, having been nearly one year back, this Court is of the view that one more opportunity can be granted to the Department to pursue the revisional remedy and if they are unable to obtain any orders, either interim or final, then, they have to comply with the Order-in-Appeal. Writ petition disposed off - four weeks time granted to the respondent / Department from the date of receipt of the copy of this order, to obtain appropriate interim or final orders from the Revisional Authority, failing which, the orders passed by the Commissioner of Appeals, dated 29.10.2015, shall be implemented within a period of ten days from the date on which the thirty days period expires - decided against petitioner.

Summary

Issues:
Petitioner seeks mandamus to implement order of Appellate Authority reducing redemption fine and not interfering with personal penalty. Department failed to implement the order citing pending revision. Legal question of Revisional Authority's jurisdiction raised based on Punjab and Haryana High Court decision.

Analysis:
The petitioner filed a writ petition seeking the issuance of a writ of mandamus to enforce the order passed by the Appellate Authority. The Appellate Authority allowed the petitioner's appeal against the Order-in-Original, reducing the redemption fine for re-export. However, the Department did not implement the order, leading to the current writ petition before the court. The Department claimed that a revision had been filed against the order before the Joint Commissioner, and as the revision was pending, they were unable to implement the Appellate Authority's order.

During the proceedings, it was noted that no interim order had been granted by the Revisional Authority against the Appellate Authority's order. The court highlighted a relevant decision from the Punjab and Haryana High Court regarding the competence of the Revisional Authority to entertain a revision against an order passed by an officer of the same rank. The court indicated that based on this decision, the Revisional Authority might not have jurisdiction to entertain the revision petition against the Appellate Authority's order.

Considering the circumstances and the time elapsed since the Appellate Authority's order, the court decided to grant the Department four weeks to obtain appropriate interim or final orders from the Revisional Authority. If the Department failed to secure any orders within this timeframe, they were directed to comply with the Order-in-Appeal within ten days after the expiry of the thirty-day period. The court disposed of the writ petition without imposing any costs, providing the Department with an opportunity to pursue the revisional remedy before enforcing the original order.