Judgment :- Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying that in the circumstances stated therein, and in the affidavit filed therewith the High Court will be pleased to issue a writ ofMandamusdirecting the 1st respondent herein to finalise the classification of instant tea manufactured by the petitioners against the classification filed in C.L. No. 10/88-89, dated 23-3-1989 under Rule 173B of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. ORDER : This Writ Petition coming on for orders as to admission on this day upon perusing the petition and the affidavit filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of Mr. C. Natarajan, Advocate for the petitioner and of Mr. Jayachandran, Addl. Central Govt. Standing Counsel on behalf of the respondent 1 and 2 the court made the following order :- The petitioner has filed the above writ petition to issue a writ ofMandamusdirecting the first respondent to finalise the classification of the instant tea manufactured by the petitioners against the classification filed in C.L. No. 10/88-89 dated 23-3-1989 under Rule 173B of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. The petitioner has filed the classification list immediately after 1989 Budget claiming instant tea under sub-heading 2107.91, whereas the Department has required the petitioners to pay duty under sub-heading 2101.20. The petitioner paid duty under protest. The classification list has not yet been finalised by the first respondent under Rule 173B of the Central Excise Rules. Even though the petitioner has filed the classification list as early as 1989, the first respondent has not passed final orders on the classification list, with the result, the petitioner is forced to pay higher duty under protest. 2.The second respondent also issued a show cause notice against the petitioner dated 11-7-1989 purporting to raise a demand for the clearance commencing from 18-7-1987 till 29-8-1987 on the basis that there is under-valuation and misdescription. It is in these circumstances, the petitioner has filed the above writ petition seeking for the relief set out hereinabove. 3.On notice from the Court, Mr. Jayachandran, Central Government Standing Counsel appears and makes representation that the first respondent will finalise the list as expeditiously as possible. It is in these circumstances, the petitioner has filed the above writ petition seeking for the relief set out hereinabove. 3.On notice from the Court, Mr. Jayachandran, Central Government Standing Counsel appears and makes representation that the first respondent will finalise the list as expeditiously as possible. Having regard to the fact that the petitioner has filed the classification list as early as 1989 and that the petitioner is forced to pay higher duty and also has to face the show cause notice, there is justification to issue a direction as prayed for by the petitioner by directing the first respondent herein to dispose of the classification list and finalise within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed. No costs.