IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR THURSDAY, THE 14TH AUGUST 2008 / 23RD SRAVANA 1930 WP(C).No. 11747 of 2005(W) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ PALLIVALAPPIL HAMZA, S/O.ODIYIL ISMAYIL, MATTOOL AMSOM DESOM, KANNUR TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.C.MURALIKRISHNAN (PAYYANUR) RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, NEW DELHI. 2. COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, CUSTOM HOUSE, COCHIN. 3. APPRAISING OFFICER, ARREARS SECTION, CUSTOMS HOUSE, COCHIN. 4. COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS (APPEALS), COCHIN. 5. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, CIVIL STATION, KANNUR. 6. SPECIAL DEPUTY TAHSILDAR (RR), KANNUR. R5&6 BY G.P. SMT.SMITHA SUKUMARAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 14/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: TRUE COPY OF INTIMATION RECEIVED FROM VILLAGE OFFICE THROUGH POST. P2: TRUE COPY OF APPLICATION DT.4.6.2000 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE TAHSILDAR. P3: TRUE COPY OF PLAINT DT.25.9.2000 IN O.S. NO.572/2000 BEFORE THE MUNSIFF COURT, KANNUR. P4: TRUE COPY OF WRITTEN STATEMENT FILED BY THE APPRAISING OFFICER, ARREAR SECTION, CUSTOMS HOUSE, COCHIN. P5: TRUE COPY OF DECREE DT.19.6.2003 IN O.S. 572/2000. P6: TRUE COPY OF DEMAND NOTICE ISSUED BY THE SPECIAL DEPUTY TAHSILDAR, KANNUR UNDER R.R. ACT. TRUE COPY PA TO JUDGE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. .................................................................... W.P.(C) No.11747 of 2005 .................................................................... Dated this the 14th day of August, 2008. JUDGMENT The W.P. was filed more than three years back challenging recovery proceedings for recovery of penalty imposed on the petitioner under the Customs Act. Even though this court issued notice and granted stay for two months by order dated 6.4.2005, the petitioner did not file process and therefore, notice was not served. Moreover, stay also expired in June 2005 and therefore, recovery would have been continued. In any case there is no scope for entertaining challenge against recovery proceedings when the penalty order itself is not under challenge. Moreover, penalty levied under the Customs Act has to be challenged only before statutory authorities including the Tribunal. The W.P. is, therefore, devoid of any merit and is dismissed. C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR Judge pms