Amandeep Singh v. The Union Of India And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.15771 of 2018 ====================================================== Amandeep Singh, S/o Paramjit Singh, Resident of Gali No.4, Guru Teg Bahadur Nagar, Barnala, Police Station- Barnala, District- Barnala within the State of Punjab.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The Union of India through Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, Regional Unit, Patna.

2.

The Department of Central Excise and Customs, Revenue Building, Patna.

3.

The State of Bihar through Excise Commissioner, Bihar, Patna. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Pramod Kumar, Adv.

For the Respondent UOI : Mr. Awadhesh Kumar Pandey, SCCG For the Respondent/s :

Mr.Vikash Kumar, -SC-11 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JYOTI SARAN and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JYOTI SARAN) 07-01-2019 This matter has been listed under the heading 'To be Mentioned' at the instance of learned counsel appearing for the Union of India who submits that his name is missing from the list of appearing counsel present in the order disposing of the writ petition dated 20.12.2018.

The cause list does reflect the name of Mr. Awadhesh Kumar Pandey, learned Senior Panel Counsel for the Union of India but is not mentioned in our order under reference. In such view of the matter, let the name of Mr. Awadhesh Kumar Pandey, learned senior panel counsel stand incorporated in our order dated 20.12.2018 and shall be deemed to have been

Patna High Court CWJC No.15771 of 2018(3) dt.07-01-2019 2/2 pronounced as such.

Mr. Pramod Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner informs that though this Court in its order dated 20.12.2018 has observed that the petitioner has not moved the Special Court but the facts is that he had moved the Special Court, Patna through Special Case No.37 of 2018 for release of the vehicle which was rejected on 13.06.2018, but this fact was not brought to the knowledge of the Court.

The pleadings on record would confirm that the order of the Special Court was neither put up for challenge in the writ petition nor the attention of this Court was drawn. Even otherwise, the order passed by the Special Court could not have been challenged in a civil writ proceedings. The petitioner is at liberty to take recourse to such remedy as is available to him in law and for such recourse no separate order needs to be passed. (Jyoti Saran, J) ( Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J) skpathak/- U