Court directs expeditious resolution of stay matter, stresses judicial discipline.

The court set aside the decision of a new Division Bench that refused to hear a stay matter, emphasizing the importance of judicial discipline and propriety. The court directed a Division Bench to decide the stay matter in accordance with previous observations and directions. An expeditious resolution was mandated within three months, with clarification that the decision did not express any opinion on the case's merits. As no opposition affidavit was filed, the allegations in the petition were not accepted by the respondents, leading to the disposal of the writ petition with instructions for all parties to act on the court's order.

---

---

Issues:
1. Disagreement between Tribunal members on stay order amount
2. Reference to President for third member decision
3. Division Bench composition change for stay matter
4. Refusal to hear stay matter by new Division Bench
5. Judicial discipline and propriety in Tribunal decisions

Analysis:
The case involved a dispute arising from an order by the Collector of Central Excise, leading to the petitioner appealing to the Customs, Excise, and Gold Appellate Tribunal. The petitioner also sought a stay on the order, which resulted in a disagreement between two Tribunal members on the required deposit amount pending appeal. Subsequently, a reference was made to the Tribunal President for assigning the stay matter to a third member. The third member returned the reference to the Division Bench for a decision. A Division Bench comprising different members then considered the matter, deciding to postpone the stay application to be heard at a later date due to non-listing. The Division Bench also disposed of a miscellaneous application related to the stay order modification. However, on the scheduled date for the stay matter, a new Division Bench declined to hear it, citing observations from a previous order. The court emphasized the importance of judicial discipline and propriety, stating that once a Division Bench decides to hear a matter, subsequent benches should respect that decision. Consequently, the order of the new Division Bench was set aside, directing a Division Bench to decide the stay matter in line with the previous Division Bench's observations and directions from 4-1-1996. The court stressed the need for an expeditious resolution within three months and clarified that the decision did not imply any opinion on the case's merits. Since no opposition affidavit was filed, the allegations in the petition were not deemed accepted by the respondents, and the writ petition was disposed of accordingly, with all parties instructed to act on a signed copy of the order.

---