TMI Blog1984 (5) TMI 272X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Ledger Account maintained for the purpose of Central Excise clearance . 2. It has been stated in the application itself that the Rule that has been issued on the basis of the Writ application that was moved on behalf of the petitioners is not maintainable in this jurisdiction on two grounds. Firstly, the impugned order that has been assailed in the Writ petition is an order regarding the exemption of excise duty on the basis of the circulars that have been annexed as annexures A, B and C which were issued in 1981, 1982 and 1983 in respect of the sugar production made by the Hindusthan Sugar Mills Ltd For the relevant years the challenge that has been made or tried to be made by the Excise authorities is not in accordance with the orders issued by the authorities concerned and that there has been a breach of the equality clause envisaged in Article 14 as well as the fundamental rights guaranteed under Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India inasmuch as by referring to the circular issued in 1982 it has been tried to submit that a sugar mill which has not produced any sugar at all and has produced for the first time sugar after the enforcement of the second circular in 1982 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is Court. 4. Mr. Das, learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the Revenue has submitted before this Court that the Writ application is not maintainable as this Court has neither any territorial jurisdiction to entertain the same nor any part of the cause of action arose within the territorial limits of the jurisdiction of this Court. It has been submitted therefore by Mr. Das that the Writ application should be rejected and the Rule should be discharged and the interim order should be vacated It has further been submitted in this connection by Mr. Das by referring to the respondents and their addresses that all the respondents reside and have their offices outside the territorial limits of the jurisdiction of this Court and as such this application is not also maintainable on this ground. In support of this submission Mr. Das has cited some decisions of this Court as well as of the Supreme Court. 5. Dr. Pal appearing in support of the Writ application and in opposing this application for variation of the interim order has contended in the first place that the subject matter of challenge in the Writ application is about the manner of imposing Excise duty and not giving the ex ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 50 per quintal on free sale sugar and Rs. 15.30 per quintal on levy sugar on sugar produced during the period commencing from 20th October, 1981 and ending on 30th November, 1981 in excess of production during the corresponding period of 1980-81 season. It has also been stated therein that for the next year rebate of excise duty at the rate of Rs. 24.50 per quintal on levy sugar and Rs. 40/- per quintal on free sugar so that during the period commencing on 1st May, 1982 and ending on 30th September, 1982 in excess of the average production of the corresponding period of the preceding three years was declared. Similarly another notification also was issued on April 21, 1982. It has also been stated in the petition that if proper exemptions are not made in accordance with the provisions of the circular, the petitioners will be seriously prejudiced inasmuch as they will not be able to sell sugar at a lower price through their selling centre in Calcutta and this will also affect the price of the shares of the company in the share market which will ultimately affect the interest of the shareholders adversely. It has therefore been stated that a part of the cause of action arose within t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... considered the purport of the circulars mentioned in annexures A. B and C to the Writ application in the matter of grant of exemption of excise duty with respect to the excess production of sugar for the years in question. The offices of these respondents are undoubtedly outside the territorial limits of the jurisdiction of this Court. Therefore the bundle of facts which are required to be proved in order to prove that the circular has not been properly followed by the authorities concerned in the matter of determination of the average production and also the further fact that the amended circular issued in 1982 annexed as annexure B to the Writ application is in breach of Article 14 and Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution, undoubtedly has arisen outside the jurisdiction of this Court. That is. as I have said already the circular has been issued either from New Delhi where the seat of the Central Government is or in the matter of assessment by the Collector of Central Excise or by the Assistant Collector Central Excise. Sitapur Division or by the Supdt. of Central Excise. Golagokarannath, district Kheri. U. P. as well as by the Inspector. Central Excise. Hindusthan Sugar Mills Ltd ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cts of the instant case. There the question was whether a suit for damages is competent in a Court other than in the territorial limits of the Court where the wrong was done. In that case it was held that such a suit is maintainable. In the instant case, I have already stated hereinbefore that there is no question of any action being brought in for damages for wrongful action. Therefore, this is, in my opinion, not applicable to the facts of the present case. The next case that has been cited is a decision of the Division Bench reported in AIR 1983 Cal 307 (Union of India v. Hindusthan Aluminium Corporation Ltd.). There the subject-matter of challenge was a Control order fixing the retention price and selling price of ingots produced by the producer, Hindusthan Aluminium Corporation Limited by the Government under Section 3 of the Essential Commodities Act, and that was the subject-matter of challenge in the appeal before the Division Bench. While considering that, the Division Bench held that the fixation of price by the control order adversely affects the producer in selling their produce, so a part of the cause of action arises within the territorial limits of Calcutta where ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as such I am unable to hold that any part of the cause of action which is the subject-matter of challenge in this Writ application arises within the territorial limits of the jurisdiction of this Court. Giving my anxious consideration over the matters. I am constrained to hold that since the entire cause of action does not arise within the territorial limits of the jurisdiction of this Court and as all the respondents have their offices and the records of the case are also not within the territorial limits of the jurisdiction of this Court, this application does not satisfy the requirements provided under Sub-article (1) as well as Sub-article (2) of Article 226 of the Constitution of India and therefore, this application, in my opinion, is not maintainable in this jurisdiction. The application for variation of the interim order, therefore, succeeds. The interim order is vacated and the Rule is discharged and the application for contempt which has been filed is also disposed of on the above terms. There will however, be no order as to costs. 11. C. R. 12166(W) of 1983 (item No. 18) is also taken up on the consent of the learned Advocate for both the parties and is disposed of on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
