JUDGMENT (Prayer:Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondents herein to implement the Final Order No.40262/2022 in C/Appeal No.40021/2022 dated 24.06.2022 dated 24.06.2022, passed by the learned Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai, which order came to be accepted by the Respondents, vide communication dated 15.10.2022, wherein, the said order had allowed the release of and also seeking for a further direction to issue detention certificate in terms of Reg.6(1) of the Handing of Cargos in Customs Area Regulations, 2009, by also considering the representation of the petitioner dated 18.07.2022, by taking into consideration that the subject Bill of Bill of Entry No.4281619 dated 11.06.2021 is pending clearance from June 2021, which is a live consignment.) 1. The petitioner has filed this writ petition for a Mandamus to direct the respondent to implement the order of the CESTAT Final Order No.40262/2022 in Customs Appeal No.40021/2022. 2. By the aforesaid order, the Tribunal has held as under:- “12. We are therefore of the considered opinion that the order for confiscation and re-export made in regard to 26 nos. of kids bikes does not require interference. From the records, it is seen that the goods were subjected to quality assurance test by National Accreditation Board for Testing & Calibration Laboratory (NABL). This report is dated 30.05.2018. It can be presumed that before the original export to USA, the goods were subjected to test for quality and standards. It is affirmed by the department that the reimported 157 bikes belong to the lot that was originally exported. Therefore, it has to be construed that the appellant has complied with requirement of BIS standard (brand name) as well as identity of 157 nos. of bikes. We hold that the order of confiscation and re-export in respect of 157 bikes requires to be set aside which we hereby do. 13. The impugned order is set aside and modified to the effect that the 157 nos. of kids bikes have to be released to the appellants for home consumption. Confiscation and order to re-export or for destruction of remaining 26 nos. of kids bikes is upheld. The redemption fine of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakhs Only) is imposed for the entire goods. We direct that 157 nos. of kids bikes have to be released to the appellants for home consumption. Confiscation and order to re-export or for destruction of remaining 26 nos. of kids bikes is upheld. The redemption fine of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakhs Only) is imposed for the entire goods. We direct that 157 nos. of kids bike has to be released on payment of redemption fine Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand Only). The requirement to pay redemption fine for 26 nos. of bikes for re-export is set aside. The penalty of Rs.50,000/- imposed under Section 112 (a) of the Customs Act, 1962 is reduced to Rs.1,000/- (Rupees One Thousand Only).” 3. After the aforesaid order was passed, it appears that the petitioner has also paid the nominal duty that was imposed on 18.11.2022 amounting to Rs.91,665/- which is inclusive of fine and penalty as was upheld by the Appellate Commissioner which was the subject matter of the appeal before the CESTAT in the above case. 4. The specific case of the petitioner is that despite the order being passed as early as on 24.06.2022, the order has not been implemented. The petitioner has sent a letter/representation dated 18.07.2022. It is further submitted that the petitioner has also paid the duty and the fine penalty that was imposed on the petitioner. 5. Defending the stand of the respondents, the learned Senior Standing Counsel for the respondents would submit that the letter which has been filed by the petitioner with the respondents on 18.07.2022, merely asks for waiver of demurrage/storage charges and not for the release of goods. 6. It is submitted that the petitioner has to elect one of the two options in Paragraph No.13 of the order which has been extracted above. 7. The learned Senior Standing for the respondents submits that if the petitioner is desirous to get the Order of the CESTAT implemented, then the petitioner must approach the concerned Shed Officer and perform his obligations under Para 13 of the CESTAT Order, more particularly elect either for destruction of 26 Bikes. Therefore, the CESTAT''S Order will be implemented as a whole. 8. I have considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Senior Standing Counsel for the respondents. 9. I have perused the order passed by the CESTAT on 18.07.2022 in Final Order No.40262 of 2022 in C/Appeal No.40021 of 2022. 10. Therefore, the CESTAT''S Order will be implemented as a whole. 8. I have considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Senior Standing Counsel for the respondents. 9. I have perused the order passed by the CESTAT on 18.07.2022 in Final Order No.40262 of 2022 in C/Appeal No.40021 of 2022. 10. I have also perused the representation filed by the petitioner dated 18.07.2022 and also perused the counter filed in support of the respondents. 11. The petitioner''s representation dated 18.07.2022 is only for waiver of demurrage/storage charges vide issuing necessary detention certificate in terms of Regulation 6(l) of the Handling of Cargos in Cargos in Customs Area Regulations, 2009, regarding the Bill of Entry No.4281619 dated 11.06.2021, which is now stationed at Chandra CFS, Chennai. 12. As far as the implementation of CESTAT order is concerned, the petitioner has to elect either the re-export the goods or opt for destruction of 26 kids bikes. Without the petitioner electing, the respondents cannot comply with the CESTAT''S Order. 13. Therefore, this writ petition is disposed of by directing the petitioner to give an appropriate representation to the second respondent within a period of two (2) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The second respondent shall dispose both the representations on merits and in accordance with law within a period of four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 14. The second respondent shall also dispose of the petitioner''s representation dated 18.07.2022 for waiver of demurrage/storage charges. 15. The writ petition stands disposed of with the above observations and directions. No cost.