2019 (6) TMI 1163 - HC - Customs

Arrival of unaccompanied baggage within the jurisdiction of the respondent at Kochi - no adjudication could be done inspite of the earnest efforts of the petitioner - HELD THAT - This writ petition is disposed of directing the respondent to finalize the proceedings at the earliest possible and at any rate within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. If the petitioner makes any application for any intervening arrangements, it shall also be considered in accordance with law, after affording an opportunity of being heard to the parties in this writ petition. Petition disposed off.

Summary

Issues:
1. Petitioner seeking release of imported goods under Baggage Declaration
2. Delay in adjudication by the respondent regarding unaccompanied baggage

Analysis:
1. The petitioner filed a writ petition seeking the release of goods imported under a Baggage Declaration and requested a writ of mandamus or any appropriate direction for the respondent to release the goods. The petitioner also sought provisional release of the goods covered under the declaration. The High Court acknowledged the grievance of the petitioner regarding the arrival of unaccompanied baggage within the respondent's jurisdiction at Kochi. The court noted that despite the petitioner's efforts, no adjudication had been done by the respondent, leading the petitioner to seek relief through the court.

2. The respondent filed a detailed counter affidavit justifying their stance and highlighted that the petitioner had not provided evidence to support their claim against the unaccompanied baggage. The respondent also raised other contentions in response to the petitioner's claims. After hearing the arguments from both parties, the High Court disposed of the writ petition by directing the respondent to finalize the proceedings promptly, within a maximum period of two months from the date of receiving a copy of the judgment. The court also mentioned that any application for intervening arrangements by the petitioner would be considered in accordance with the law, with an opportunity for both parties to be heard.

This judgment emphasizes the importance of timely adjudication in cases involving imported goods and unaccompanied baggage. It highlights the court's role in ensuring that administrative processes are completed efficiently and within a reasonable timeframe. The decision underscores the need for parties to provide necessary evidence to support their claims and the court's commitment to delivering justice by setting clear timelines for resolution.