9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
Application under Articles 226 and 227 for a writ of certiorari to quash a notice by the Superintendent, Central Excise, and an order imposing a penalty for contravention of Central Excise Rules. Analysis: 1. The petitioner filed an appeal against the Superintendent's order to the Collector, which was rejected. Subsequently, a revision petition was filed to the Government of India. The judgment cites the principle that the order of the original authority merges with the order of the appellate authority, and the High Court cannot issue a writ to the original authority if the appellate authority is beyond its territorial jurisdiction. 2. Referring to a previous decision, the judgment discusses the merger of orders made by different authorities. It highlights the importance of compliance with the conditions precedent for filing appeals or revision petitions. The argument that the orders did not merge due to non-compliance with deposit requirements is rejected based on legal principles and previous court decisions. 3. The judgment further discusses decisions from various High Courts regarding the dismissal of appeals and their effect on affirming the decision of the lower court. It emphasizes that the dismissal of the petitioner's appeal and revision petition by the Collector and the Government of India affirmed the decision of the Superintendent, leading to the merger of orders. 4. Based on the above analysis, the High Court dismisses the application for a writ of certiorari to quash the decision of the original authority, the Superintendent, Central Excise, Raipur. The petitioner is not awarded costs, and the security deposit amount is to be refunded. The judgment concludes by affirming the merger of orders and the legal implications of dismissal of appeals on the decisions of lower authorities.
|
