1998 (4) TMI 139

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ule returnable forthwith. Respondents waive service through Mr. Choube. By consent, Rule is called out for hearing and heard finally. 2.The petitioner has filed an appeal before the Commissioner of Appeals, Central Excise (second respondent) under Section 35 of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The petitioner simultaneously moved an application under Section 35F of the Act seeking stay of the execu....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Nagpur to attend the hearing of Section 35F application on that day at Bhopal. It was obviously impossible for the petitioner to do so. The second respondent thereupon made an order dated March 19/23, 1998 impugned in this writ petition, dismissing the stay application on the ground that the petitioner did not turn up for the personal hearing and that as he was busy with the election duty which he....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ealise that he has to act in a quasi-judicial manner; his approach in making the impugned order is hardly quasi-judicial. We refrain from saying anything further. 5.In the result, we are satisfied that the impugned order needs to be quashed and set side. The impugned order of the second respondent dated March 19/23, 1998 is hereby quashed and set aside. The application of the petitioner made un....