:1: bgp bgp bgp IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORDINARY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT WRIT WRIT PETITION NO.430 OF 2008 PETITION NO.430 OF 2008 PETITION NO.430 OF 2008 P.K.Agrawal ..Petitioner Vs. The Assistant Collector of Customs and Ors. ..Respondents Mr.Anita Castellino i/b.S.M.Kazi for the Petitioner. Mr.Y.R.Bhate with Mr.D.A.Dubey for the Respondents. CORAM CORAM CORAM :- DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN & :- DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN & :- DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN & J.P.DEVADHAR,JJ. J.P.DEVADHAR,JJ. J.P.DEVADHAR,JJ. DATE DATE DATE : 10TH APRIL, 2008 : 10TH APRIL, 2008 : 10TH APRIL, 2008 P.C. P.C. P.C. 1. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties. By this Petition, the Petitioner is challenging the order dated 18th January,1996 passed by the CEGAT. It appears that the Petitioner is challenging the said order after a lapse of almost 12 years, and the only reasons for such a gross delay in approaching this Court, are given in paragraph 20 of this Petition which reads as under: 20. The impugned order was passed by the Hon’ble Customs Excise & Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal (now known as Customs Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal), West Regional Bench, Bombay on 18th January,1996. The Petitioner states that on account of financial difficulties and other valid reasons, he could not immediately file the Petition challenging the said order. The petitioner therefore prays that delay in filing the present Petition be condoned. The entire cause of action has arisen in Bombay. The Petitioner submits that this Hon’ble Court has jurisdiction to entertain and try this Petition." :2: 2. We are not at all satisfied with the explanations given in the aforesaid paragraph. The Petition suffers from gross delay. The same stands dismissed. (J.P.DEVADHAR,J.) (J.P.DEVADHAR,J.) (J.P.DEVADHAR,J.) (DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN,J.) (DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN,J.) (DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN,J.)