Madha Lorry Body Labour Works, Represented by its Proprietor, S. M. Sundararaju v. Superintendent of Central Excise, Namakkal Range
2012-10-08
M.JAICHANDREN
body2012
DigiLaw.ai
Judgment Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned counsel appearing for the first respondent. 2. At this stage of the hearing of the writ petition, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner had submitted that it would suffice, if the second respondent is directed to dispose of the Appeal, filed by the petitioner, in Appeal No.262 of 2008, on merits, within a specified period. 3. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the first respondent has no objection for such an order being passed by this Court. 4. In view of the submissions made by the learned counsels appearing on either side, the second respondent is directed to dispose of the Appeal filed by the petitioner, in Appeal No.262 of 2008, on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of 4 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. However, it is made clear that no recovery shall be initiated against the petitioner, till the final orders are passed by the second respondent, in the Appeal filed by the petitioner, in Appeal No.262 of 2008, as directed by this Court. The writ petition is ordered accordingly. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.