JUDGMENT N.K. Jain, J. 1. This is petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India seeking various reliefs as enumerated in para 32 of the petition. 2. The petitioner is a limited company incorporated and registered under the Companies Act. It has established its solvent extraction plant at Banjari Distt. Khargone (W. Nimar) for manufacture of oil by solvent extraction method from oilseeds such as soyabean, rape seed, cotton seed, etc. On 29-5-1986, the respondent No. 1 has issued two notifications of exemption and credit from Excise duty in terms of Rule 8 of the Central Excise Rules (vide C-1 and C-2). This exemption is available on certain conditions. The petitioner claimed to have fulfilled all the conditions of the said notifications and filed returns -with the respondent No. 3 for issuing certificate in the prescribed form (vide Annexure E-l/1 to E-l/10 and E-2/1 to E-2/4). The authority, however, granted certificate only in respect of part of the quantity of production and kept the matter pending for remaining part of the quantity. During the pendency of this request, the Assessing Authority proceeded with the assessment and calculated the same without awaiting final result of the request about certificates, against the petitioner demanded payment of excise duty. The petitioner filed two suits against the demand orders of the respondent No. 2 before the Collectors (Appeal) Central Excise, New Delhi. The Collector (Appeals) has remanded Appeal No. 440-C.E./Appeal 18D/88 while the other appeal is still pending without Appellate authority. 3. The petitioner aggrieved by the non-consideration and non-disposal of the request as regard grant of certificate in respect of the remaining part of quantity of production as also by the order passed in appeal and the order of assessment demanding excise duty has come up before this court by filing this writ petition for appropriate directions as enumerated in para 32. 4. I have heard counsel for parties. 5. Learned Counsel for petitioner submitted that the respondent No. 3 is required to decide the matter without any delay and that inordinate delay is causing harassment to the petitioner. Learned Counsel for respondents has no objection in issuance of appropriate direction for disposal of the request. 6. In view of the pendency of appeal as also the matter after remand, I find it fit not to enter into the merits of the matter. I, therefore, take care of limited grievance only. 7. Learned Counsel for respondents has no objection in issuance of appropriate direction for disposal of the request. 6. In view of the pendency of appeal as also the matter after remand, I find it fit not to enter into the merits of the matter. I, therefore, take care of limited grievance only. 7. In the result, the petition is disposed of with the direction to respondent No. 3 to consider the aforesaid returns marked as E-l/1 to E-l/10 and E-2/1 to E-2/4 with regard to grant of certificate of exemption about remaining part of quantity of production after giving reasonable opportunity of hearing to the petitioner in this behalf, in conformity with law and within a period of four months from today. 8. If the ultimate decision of respondent No. 3 goes against the petitioner, the petitioner shall have liberty to challenge the decision before appropriate forum. 9. In view of this direction, the petitioner may make appropriate prayer before the appellate authority as also before the adjudicating authority to keep the appeal and the original matter pending, till decision is rendered by the respondent No. 3 on the question of certificate of exemption as noted above. The appellate authority as also the adjudicating authority in that event shall consider the request in accordance with law. 10. Thus this petition stands disposed of as aforesaid but without any order as to costs. Security amount, if any, shall be refunded to the petitioner after verification.