High Court stresses exhausting statutory remedies before writ petitions, directs appeal filing under Customs Act.

The High Court emphasized the importance of exhausting statutory appellate remedies before resorting to writ petitions. The petitioner was directed to file an appeal under the Customs Act within 60 days, with the appellate authority instructed to consider the appeal on merits without being constrained by the limitation period. The court dismissed the writ petition and closed all related miscellaneous petitions, underscoring the need to respect the hierarchy of institutions and the legislative intent behind appellate remedies.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Violation of Principles of Natural Justice
2. Availability and necessity of statutory appellate remedy
3. Jurisdiction of High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India

Detailed Analysis:

Violation of Principles of Natural Justice:
The petitioner contended that the impugned order was passed without issuing a show cause notice, thus violating the Principles of Natural Justice. The second respondent, however, claimed that a show cause notice dated 10.03.2017 had indeed been issued. The petitioner argued that they were not given an opportunity to present their case, making the order unilateral and necessitating the writ petition. The respondents countered this by stating that the show cause notice was referenced in the proceedings dated 01.03.2021, implying that the petitioner's claim was based on incorrect facts.

Availability and Necessity of Statutory Appellate Remedy:
The court emphasized that the statutory appellate remedy provided under the Customs Act, 1962, is a valuable right conferred on a litigant and cannot be dispensed with routinely by the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The impugned order itself indicated that an appeal could be filed before the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) within 60 days. The petitioner, instead of availing this remedy, chose to file a writ petition, which the court did not appreciate. The court noted that the appellate authorities are competent to grant interim orders and consider appeals on merits, thus protecting the interest of litigants.

Jurisdiction of High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India:
The court reiterated that the High Court should not entertain writ petitions in the presence of an available appellate remedy. The court cited previous judgments to support the view that the appellate remedy must be exhausted in all circumstances, except under extraordinary situations to mitigate injustice. The court also mentioned that the High Court cannot adjudicate on facts and merits with reference to documents and evidences, which is the domain of the appellate authorities. The court highlighted the legislative intention behind providing appellate remedies and stressed that institutional respect and the hierarchy of institutions must be maintained.

Conclusion:
The court concluded that the petitioner is bound to exhaust the appellate remedy provided under Sections 128 and 129 of the Customs Act, 1962. The petitioner was directed to file an appeal within 60 days from the date of receipt of the order, and the appellate authority was instructed to entertain the appeal without reference to the period of limitation, adjudicating the matter on merits and in accordance with law. The writ petition was dismissed, and no costs were imposed. Consequently, all connected miscellaneous petitions were also closed.

---