9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (6) TMI 659X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... C).No.14690 of 2023. 2. The brief facts necessary for the disposal of this Writ Appeal are as follows: The appellant is stated to be a leading manufacturer and exporter of cashew based products. He had initially exported 400 cartons of organic cashew Kernels, which was rejected by the overseas agency and duly returned to the Cochin Port so as to enable the appellant to reexport the goods after curing the defects and reprocessing the same. During the course of inspection by the customs authorities at that stage, 200 cartons consisting of 4536 Kg of organic cashew kernels were found unfit for home consumption, and a confiscation order was passed confiscating the said consignment and directing a destruction of the same apart from imposing a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd disposing the Writ Petition itself by relegating the appellant to his alternate remedy of impugning the confiscation order before the First Appellate Authority by excluding the time spent pursuing the Writ Petition. 4. In the proceedings that followed, the Appellate Authority confirmed the confiscation order by Ext.P16 order. Ext.P16 order was then impugned by the appellant in WP(C).No. 14690 of 2023, from which this appeal arises. 5. The learned Single Judge who considered the Writ Petition took note of the aforesaid sequence of events and, after noticing the contentions of the learned counsel for the appellant herein, found that it was based on the permission granted to the appellant by this Court in the earlier round of litigation t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nterest of justice that this Court exercises its jurisdiction in the matter so that expeditious relief could be obtained by the appellant. 7. We have heard the submission of learned counsel for the appellant Sri. Aswin Gopakumar as also Smt. Chithra P. George, the learned counsel for the 2nd respondent and Smt. Sheeladevi, the learned counsel for the 1st respondent. 8. On a consideration of the rival submissions we find ourselves unable to accept the contentions of the learned counsel for the appellant on the desirability of this Court entertaining the matter in the exercise of its powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. While it is no doubt well settled that the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 ca ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
