9911796707
TMI Blog1989 (2) TMI 122X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the adjudicating officer when the case is fixed for hearing, failing which he was informed that the case will be decided with the evidence on record without any further hearing. This notice was challenged by the appellant in O.P.No. 6349 of 1984 filed on 24th July 1984. That writ petition came up before the learned single Judge on more than one occasion and it came to be admitted on 31st July, 1984. The Collector of Customs however passed a final order in pursuance of the notice Ext. P-1 on the 27th July, 1984 as per Ext. P14, confiscating the goods covered by three bills of entry under Section 111-D of the Customs Act. The appellants has been given an option to redeem the goods for home consumption on payment of a fine of Rs. 6 lakhs in li ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that no date of hearing as such was filed by the Collector and therefore the Collector was not entitled to pass the order Ext. P14 without fixing a date of hearing. 3. Shri Madhavan Nambiar, the learned Counsel for the respondents, submitted that there is no justification for drawing the inference that the Collector proceeded to dispose of the matter with a view to render the writ petition filed by the appellant infructuous. He submitted that it is a bona fide act in the course of his official work which cannot be found fault with. We do not consider it necessary to probe this matter any further as we are inclined to take the view that there are adequate reasons for us to interfere with the impugned order, Ext. P14. The Notice Ext. P1 ma ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ess exercise. Besides, it is necessary to point out that the impugned order having been made by the Collector during the pendency of O.P. 6439/1984 in which the appellant has challenged Ext. P1 notice the appellant's conduct must be regarded as bona fide in pursuing his remedy before this Court. If in this background, the appellant did not participate in the proceedings before the Collector by filing a written statement, we are inclined to take the view that the appellant should not suffer for having taken resort to the proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution. Having regard to these special factors and features of this case, we are inclined to interfer with the order impugned, Ext. P14, without expressing any opinion in regard to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
