9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (6) TMI 324X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oner from pursuing this writ petition. Ext.P7 was issued as early as on 29.12.2021 while this writ petition was preferred only on 04.03.2022. The remedy of an appeal provided under Plant Quarantine (Regulation of Import into India) Order, 2003 is seven days. The reason for prescribing the limited period of seven days is with a purpose, since, orders of destruction or other adverse orders ought to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the 2nd respondent directing destruction of consignment of goods imported by the petitioner. Petitioner also challenges Ext.P8 order issued by the 3rd respondent ordering confiscation, destruction and imposition of penalty. 2. The impugned orders are with respect to goods 2nd Grade Wet Dates imported by the petitioner on the basis of Phytosanitary certificate issued from the Department of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sion of the petitioner himself, that he is ready to destroy the cargo and that there was no possibility of any reexport. 5. Considering the contentions raised by the petitioner as well as the learned counsel for the 3rd respondent, I am of the view that the delay in approaching this Court against Ext.P7 itself, disables the petitioner from pursuing this writ petition. Ext.P7 was issued as early ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o especially since there was no possibility of any re-export. After making such a concession before the statutory authority, petitioner cannot turn around and challenge the order issued on the basis of his own concessions. Petitioner is estopped from challenging Ext.P8. 7. In view of the above, leaving open the question of jurisdiction of the 2nd respondent to issue an order of destruction, in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
