IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.PRAKASH RAO and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.Y.SOMAYAJULU WRIT PETITION NO : 8069 of 2008 Between: CDR Health Care Ltd., Hyderabad rep. by its Director, D. Bhaskar Reddy, C/o. M/s. Gagan Mahal Nursing Home, Premises No.1-2-379, Domalguda, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Commissioner of Customs (Appeals), Customs House, Chennai. 2 The Commissioner of Central Excise and Service Tax Basheerbagh, Hyderabad. 3 The Deputy Commissioner, Air Cargo Complex, Meenam Bakkam, Chennai. .....RESPONDENT(S) Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue a Writ or order/s more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not raising the attachment over the property bearing No.1-2-379 situated at Domalguda, Hyderabad pursuant to the order dt. 27.04.2007 in proceedings No. C.No.CUS/HYD-II/ARC/35/2003 issued by the 1st respondent, as being illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional and be pleased to pass such other order/s Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.B.VIJAYSEN REDDY Counsel for the Respondents: MR.A.RAJASHEKAR REDDY (ASST SOLICITOR GEN) The Court made the following : Form-NIC-OGS/WP{MSN} ORDER (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice B. Prakash Rao): Heard Sri B. Vijayasen Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner-company and Sri A. Rajashekar Reddy, learned Assistant Solicitor General, appearing for the respondents, and at their request, the writ petition itself is taken up for disposal at the admission stage. 2. The petitioner-company though seeks to assail the action on the part of the respondents by way of Writ of Mandamus as against not raising the attachment in respect of the property in question, situated at Domalaguda, Hyderabad, in pursuance of the proceedings issued by the 1st respondent, its main grievance is that the having regard to the fact that all the questions have to be gone into the main appeal, which is pending on the file of the 1st respondent, as a consequent to the remand order, dated 01-08-2007, made earlier by the appellate authority, it is not necessary that the property should be attached, as the petitioner is prepared to furnish bank guarantee to the extent of Rs.1,00,00,000/- (Rupees one crore only). 3. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the material available on record, and especially in view of the fact that the main appeal is still pending consideration on the file of the 1st respondent, where all such questions have to be gone into, we are refrained to go into the contentions urged on both sides and it will be suffice in the interest of justice to dispose of the writ petition directing R-1 to dispose of the appeal. 4. Further, no prejudice will be caused to the respondents, and their interest is safeguarded if the petitioner is permitted to furnish bank guarantee to the extent of rupees one crore and on furnishing said bank guarantee, the attachment order is raised. 5. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of directing the 1st respondent-The Commissioner of Customs (Appeals), Customs House, Chennai, to dispose of the appeal, on merits, in accordance with law, after giving an opportunity of hearing the petitioner. Further, on furnishing bank guarantee to the extent of Rs.1,00,00,000/- (Rupees one crore only), the respondents are directed to raise the attachment on the property. 6. With the aforementioned direction, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. _______________________ JUSTICE B.PRAKASHRAO ________________________ April 30, 2008 JUSTICE C.Y.SOMAYAJULU kvr