INTHE MATTER OF: M/ Uwh d. s niort Lt 23—945, Urla Indsri Area Satora, Raipur hrough It’s General Manager Commerc1 P Versus 3 The superintendent Central Excl t Rg ane-IV 1v1 ine aiuir 1 (p) . Commissioner of Central EXCise Apeais entra xcise Bulldmg, hamtan lkarapara aiur CG. iona Cossone ustoms & Central Xci hamta'ri Roa aipur (CG R ) / , se & Cusoms C1 Ls ‘Rp (CG) 2 - . .. ‘R'oi‘d's ' esplent rit etiton uner Arce on W pi d til 226 of‘the Cstitution o sg 07 rd n f r ature o certioran or any other appropriate writ orde ettin aside the lmpugwd Stay Order \Io 04/??? I/2Gu7 dated 2G 3 20 esponent no l m Appeal No 4l~CE/RPR/APPL 1/2007 I 7g0 9 utal , T (al) Shrl A Khetan Cl E ‘ D Road T Rp () Addtil mmiir, C Ese, D d, HIGH C01 TRT OF CHHATTlgGARH AT BILASPUR WRII PE'UTKN ('1) No 4897 of 067 PETHIONER Mis. UniWOIth LL, VFR {H RESPONDENTS Cnmxmsqoner o; Central Excise kappaak; é’c Omexs WRIT PETITION UNDER ARI ICLE 226 OF IHE CO q K'I‘UHON OF INDIA SB. Han’ble fabri isatlsh K. Amnhatri. J. Fresent: 3hr; C.K.Sahu, Advocate for the petitioner‘ Ms. N.AAii , Advucaie wiih Shri Mauish Shanna, Advocaie for the respondems, by.“ 0 R D E R (Passed 0n 14‘}; day 6fN9vemba 2O 1 1) , Challgnge in 1h“ yeiitian is i0 the Ega‘lity and validity of the order daiéd 26.032997 (Amiexure Pfl) passed by thg rssyondém. No: in T? 1 F,NQ,41-CE/RPR/APPLJJ2007§ Whéreby§ a waiwr was grantad to tha patitiorier 011 the cemiition that the petitiener had to pre- (ieposit an amountv 0f RS, 25 lacs, 0n or befare 110412907, 2, At thé v©ry outsst, Ms A11§ leamsd counssi appearing for thé raspondents submits that finaiv order has alrsasy beet: passed i1: the aforesaid appeai on $9,05‘2007 and the apyeai has been dismissed, Even; the getitioa Le, W,P.(T). N0. 6025/2007 flied against the final order dated 09.G5.2(}O7§ has also’been dismissed by this Calm. vide ) order dated 08, 11.2G11 Thus, this peiition seeking quash'mg of imeraii (mien does not Siwvive ai this stage, :93, 3. $ivri Sahug ieamed counsel aooearing for the oetitioner fairly submas that final order daied 09:952007 yassed iii the appeai was challenged before this Court. in writ petition and the same has been dismissed. Thus; nothing survives for adjudication; 4, In View of the aboveg this petition is disnosed of in the light. of the order dated G8, 11,2011 passed in W.?.(T) No, 602512G0’?‘ ‘i No order asto costs. Sd/- \ W e ' Satish K. Agnihotri F Judge Amit