1 ca1429-11 agk IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO.1429 OF 2011 IN WITH PETITION NO.1365 OF 2011. M/s.Huawei Technoligies Co. Limited ..Petitioner Versus Designated Authority, Director General of Anti-Dumping and Allies Duties & Others ..Respondents. Mr.V. Sridharan with Mr.Prakash Shah i/by PDS Legal for the petitioner. Mr.Adwait Sethan with Mr.Sohan Sinha i/by Mr.Dhiren Shah for respondent Nos.1 and 2. Mr.D.B. Shroff, Senior Counsel with Mr.Jitendra Jain i/by Mr.Hiren Mehta for respondent No.3. CORAM : J.P. Devadhar & Smt.R.S. Dalvi, JJ. DATE : 18th July, 2011. P.C. : 1. In the light of the order passed by the CESTAT on 15th June 2011, the Petitioner has filed the present Civil Application seeking directions to the CESTAT to decide the Appeal filed by the petitioner on 21st March 2011 on or before 31st July 2011. 2. In the present case, Writ Petition No.1365 of 2011 was filed by the petitioner to challenge the order of final findings recorded by the 2 ca1429-11 Designated Authority (DA) on 19th October, 2010. 3. During the course of hearing of the above writ petition, it was brought to our notice that the DA passed the order on final findings pursuant to the order passed by the Apex Court on 19th March, 2010 in an SLP filed before it to challenge the preliminary findings dated 7th September 2009 and the Notification issued thereunder on 8th December 2009. By the said order, the Apex court while entertaining the Special Leave Petition directed the DA to continue with the proceedings and record the final findings which would be subject to the result of the pending S.L.P. Accordingly, the DA passed the order recording final findings on 19th October, 2010. 4. It was also brought to our notice that while the petitioner filed writ petition No.1365 of 2011 in this Court to challenge the final findings, an SLP was also filed before the Apex Court to challenge the final findings and the Apex Court by its order dated 4th February 2011, allowed the parties therein to withdraw the SLP and granted liberty to the parties therein to resort to the alternate remedy of appeal provided under the Customs Tariff Act, 1975. 5. In these circumstances, we disposed of Writ Petition No.1365 of 2011 by our order dated 17th March 2011, with a direction to the petitioner to file an appeal and further directed the CESTAT to dispose of the appeal 3 ca1429-11 expeditiously and in any case within a period of three months from the date of the order. 6. By the impugned order dated 15th June 2011, the CESTAT instead of disposing of the appeal on merits has directed the parties to seek modification either from the Apex Court or from this Hon’ble Court as to whether the appeals can be proceeded with in view of the pendency of the SLP before the Apex Court. 7. Mr.Shroff, learned Senior Advocate appearing on behalf of respondent No.3 vehemently submitted that since the Apex Court has fixed the matter for hearing in the first week of August 2011, the proceedings before the CESTAT may not be continued till the SLP is disposed off by the Apex court. Alternatively, he submitted that time for disposal of the appeal by CESTAT be extended. 8. In the present case, since the Apex Court has declined to entertain the Special Leave Petition filed against the final findings and directed the parties to resort to the appellate remedy, we had declined to entertain the writ petition and by our order dated 17th March 2011 directed the petitioner to file an appeal and further directed the CESTAT to dispose off the appeal within a period of three months. As our order is clear and unambiguous, there is no question of clarifying our order dated 17th March 4 ca1429-11 2011. However, at the request of the Counsel for respondent No.3, we direct the CESTAT to dispose of the appeal as expeditiously as possible and in any event not later than four weeks from today. 9. The civil application is accordingly disposed off with no order as to costs. (Smt.R.S. Dalvi, J.) (J.P. Devadhar, J.)