AJOY NATH RAY, J. ( 1 ) THE writ petitioners have pressed their case and the Customs Authorities have raised no substantial opposition to the way the case has been pressed. ( 2 ) IN brief the facts are these. Sometime in September 1994 Tarun Kumar Chatterjee, J. ordered to the effect that the goods of the writ petitioners be released on payment of customs duty and a requisite detention certificate acceptable to the Airport Authority do issue. ( 3 ) THE purport of the order would be that the goods would be released on payment of customs duty but no detention charges would have to be paid. The Customs Authorities issued an exemption certificate (see page 41) which was acceptable to the Airport Authorities. ( 4 ) THE goods were released on payment of duty. ( 5 ) THE procedure adopted however was, that the Airport charges, which were in effect disallowed by the learned Judge, were paid and refund thereof was to be obtained from the Airport Authority on the basis of the Court's order. ( 6 ) THE shed charges paid amounted to Rs. 2,06,400/ -. ( 7 ) FOR reasons best known to the International Airport Authority only 75% approximately of the said sum has been refunded i. e. Rs. 1,49,821/ -. It was paid by a cheque dated 8-2-1994 (see page 48 ). ( 8 ) THE Airport Authority have not appeared before me. There is no reason why they should appear because the balance sum of Rs. 56,579/- is clearly payable by them. Being a public authority it would be unreasonable on their part to withhold the sum without any just cause. A writ is, therefore, permissible for such recovery instead of having to file an ordinary suit, which tends to become a long drawn affair. There will be writs absolute in terms of prayers (a) and (b) and there will also be an order in terms of prayer (e) but all this will be as against the respondent No. 3, and the respondent No. 3 only and further that interest will be paid if and only if payment of the principal sum of Rs. 56,579/- is not made within a month hereof.