(1) LEAVE granted, (2) THE Letters Patent Appeal was dismissed by the division bench of he High court assuming that the order made by the learned Single Judge was with the consent of parties. We are unable to construe the order of the learned Single Judge as a consent order. Dismissal of the Letters Patent Appeal on that assumption was, therefore, incorrect. (3) WE have heard both sides on merits for the purpose of deciding the case on its merits. Learned counsel for the respondent stated that the respondents have already approached the B.I.F.R. That being so, the direction given by the learned Single Judge, in the Writ Petition filed by the respondents, to the : effect that status quo would be maintained in respect of recovery of the excise duty, was wholly unwarranted. This part of the direction of the learned Single Judge was unjustified. (4) WE may add that there was no occasion for any order to be made in favour of the respondents in their Writ Petition. (5) ACCORDINGLY, the order of the learned Single Judge as well as of the division bench is set aside with the result that the Writ Petitions filed by the respondents in the High court stand dismissed. (6) THE appeals are allowed in these terms.