High Court Patna High Court - Orders

Surinder Chouwdhary vs The Union Of India & Ors on 23 September, 2011

Patna High Court – Orders
Surinder Chouwdhary vs The Union Of India & Ors on 23 September, 2011
                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                         Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.2524 of 2011
                   SURINDER CHOUDHARY, SON OF LATE PHAGUNI CHOUDHARY
                   RESIDENT OF VILLAGE MADHAUL, P.O. MOTIPUR, VIA TAJPUR,
                   P.S. TAJPUR, DIST. SAMASTIPUR.
                                           Versus
                   1. THE UNION OF INDIA THROUGH THE SECRETARY, SRI
                      SUNIL MITRA, DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE(REVENUE)
                      CUSTOM AND CENTRAL EXCISE NORTH BLOCK NEW
                      DELHI.
                   2. THE CHAIRMAN, BOARD OF CUSTOM AND CENTRAL
                      EXCISE, SRI S. DUTT MAJUMDAR, DEPARTMENT OF
                      REVENUE, GOVT. OF INDIA NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI.
                   3. THE COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOM AND CENTRAL EXCISE,
                      SMT. RINA ARYA, NOIDA B.123, SECTOR V NOIDA U.P.
                   4. THE CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOM AND CENTRAL
                      EXCISE SRI BISHWAJIT DUTTA, REVENUE BUILDING,
                      BIRCHAND PATEL MARG, PATNA.
                                            ---------------

03. 23.09.2011 Counsel for the Central Excise Department

states that in compliance of the order of the High

Court dated 13.12.2010, Annexure-1 representation

of the petitioner dated 30.12.2006 has already been

considered and reasoned order communicated to the

petitioner, which fact is also accepted by the learned

counsel for the petitioner.

In view of the fact that order of the High

Court has already been complied with this contempt

petition is disposed of granting liberty to the

petitioner to challenge the order disposing of the

representation dated 30.12.2006 as also the

supplementary representation dated 19.01.2011
2

Annexure-2 which was also disposed of by the same

order by which the earlier representation has been

disposed of, against which petitioner has already filed

writ petition. Petitioner is also at liberty to raise all

the points in the writ petition, which has been raised

in the contempt petition.

Rajesh/                               ( V. N. Sinha, J.)