JUDGMENT 1. We have heard learned Counsel for the parties. 2. This petition is directed to seek a mandamus against the respondents that they be directed to return 85 silver slabs/bars, which were seized by the officers of the Central Excise and Customs Department on 3-8-1965 and 8-8-1965 from the residential premises of the petitioner in compliance of the order of CEGAT dated 14-8-1997 in Appeal No. C/543/95/NB [1998 (99) E.L.T. 332 (Tri.). 3. The CEGAT has held the aforesaid 85 silver slabs/bars, which were of foreign markings, were with the petitioner more than 30 to 50 years before the date of seizure and therefore, cannot be termed as smuggled goods, liable to be confiscated. In spite of the order of the CEGAT, the Customs Department has not returned slabs to the petitioner notwithstanding there was no order passed by any court staying operation of CEGAT. 4. The reference application moved before the CEGAT was also dismissed by it. This writ petition was kept pending as an application Under Section 130 of the Customs Act, 1962 was pending before this Court on behalf of the Customs Department for seeking a reference to this Court. D.B. Civil Reference Application No. 21/2003 (Commissioner, Central Excise v. Gunwant Lal) has since been dismissed by this Court on 30-10-2003. 5. These facts are not in dispute. In view of this, it is apparent that the respondents have no justification now to retain the silver slabs/bars which were handed over to them by the District Collector, Chittorgarh, who has earlier dealt with the same under the Treasure Trove Act, 1878 proceedings, which were found to be untenable by this Court vide order dated 27-4-1992. 6. The only contention raised by the learned Counsel for the respondents was that once the order having been passed in favour of the petitioner, writ of mandamus cannot be sought for the purpose of execution of that order. However, he is unable to say if the authorities do not comply with the direction of CEGAT what other remedy the petitioner is having except to come before this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 7. Accordingly, the petition is allowed. However, he is unable to say if the authorities do not comply with the direction of CEGAT what other remedy the petitioner is having except to come before this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 7. Accordingly, the petition is allowed. The respondents are directed to deliver 85 slabs seized from the premises of the petition on 3-8-1965 and 8-8-1965 respectively and which have been found to be not liable to be confiscated by the order of CEGAT dated 14-8-1997. The delivery of silver bars may be made within a period of one month. 8. There shall be no order as to costs.Writ Petition Allowed. *******