BIMALENDU ROY v. THE COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (PREVENTIVE)
Court: High Court of Meghalaya
Bench: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE I. P. MUKERJI, CHIEF JUSTICE,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE W. DIENGDOH
Judgment date:
Case summary
High Court of Meghalaya judgment dated 2024-10-18. BIMALENDU ROY v. THE COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (PREVENTIVE). Read the judgment and case details on LawSphereX.
Judgment text
Serial No. 02 HIGH COURT OF MEGHALAYA Regular List AT SHILLONG WP(C) No. 259 of 2024 Date of order: 18. 10. 2024 Shri. Bimalendu Roy ... Petitioner - Versus - The Commissioner of Customs (Preventive), North Eastern Region, CUSTOM HOUSE, 110, M. G. Road, Shillong – 793001, Meghalaya. ... Respondent Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice I. P. Mukerji, Chief Justice Hon’ble Mr. Justice W. Diengdoh, Judge Appearance: For the Petitioner : Mr. N. Dasgupta, Adv. with Mrs. A. Synrem, Adv. For the Respondent : Dr. N. Mozika, DSGI with Ms. K. Gurung, Adv. i) Whether approved for Yes/No reporting in Law journals etc. : ii) Whether approved for publication Yes/No in press: (Made by Hon’ble, the Chief Justice) This is a writ petition directly instituted before our Division Bench. The question is whether this writ petition is maintainable before this Bench.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he does not find any authority which is superior to the authority which passed the impugned order empowered to hear this appeal. The appellant having no other remedy has approached this Court in its writ jurisdiction through the Division Bench. We may refer to a portion of Rule 4 of the High Court of Meghalaya Rules, 2013 which reads as follows: “4. Matters cognizable by Division Bench. – (1) Petition falling within any one or more of the following categories shall be heard by a Division Bench except where the Chief Justice otherwise directs: (a) Public Interest Litigation; (b) Habeas Corpus Application, (c) Petition relating to externment or deportation; (d) A Petition which a Single Judge has referred to the Chief Justice for placing it before the Division Bench having regard to the importance of complexity of the case. (e) Writ Petition in which constitutional validity of any Act, Rules or any provisions thereof have been challenged.
(f) Any other matter regarding which the Chief Justice has directed to be listed before Division Bench and (g) Any matter required to be heard by Division Bench under a Statute. ....... ” Only writs which are specifically classified can be moved before the division bench. This is not one of the matters mentioned in the Rules which could be moved before a division bench. Neither there is any direction of the Chief Justice in this behalf. In those circumstances, this writ petition from the impugned decision of the Customs authority is not maintainable. We dismiss this writ petition [WP(C) No. 259 of 2024] with the express liberty granted to the petitioner to approach an appropriate jurisdiction in respect of the same cause of action. (W. Diengdoh) (I. P. Mukerji) Judge Chief Justice Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by SYLVANA LIZ KHARBHIH Date: 2024. 10. 18 13:54:05 IST
Source: High Court of Meghalaya. Dataset: Dattam Labs. CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.