Patna High Court - Orders
Cachar Supari Centre And Anr vs The Union Of India And Ors on 3 April, 2025
Author: P. B. Bajanthri
Bench: P. B. Bajanthri, Alok Kumar Sinha
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.4165 of 2015
======================================================
Cachar Supari Centre and Anr
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The Union Of India and Ors
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Prabhat Ranjan, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. K.N. Singh, ASG
Mr. Anshuman Singh, Sr. SC, Custom
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. B. BAJANTHRI
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR SINHA
ORAL ORDER
(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. B. BAJANTHRI)
31 03-04-2025Mr. Anshuman Singh, Senior Standing Counsel for Customs is raising a serious issue that petitioners while filing a petition along with the affidavit he has committed number of errors, on this score itself writ petition is liable to be dismissed.
2. At the same time, pursuant to our order dated 26.03.2025 we have asked a specific question as to whether counter affidavit filed on behalf of respondents by Narendra Kumar Choudhary, the then Assistant Commissioner has authorization from all the respondents, in this regard he has pointed out note sheet maintained by concerned department.
3. We have perused the note sheet dated 05.02.2018 it Patna High Court CWJC No.4165 of 2015(31) dt.03-04-2025 2/3 is crystal clear that there is no authorization to Narendra Kumar Choudhary. Therefore, both petitioners as well as respondents are at fault in not following certain formalities to the extent of contents in support of affidavit and counter affidavit. In not mentioning of certain words which were required to be reflected in the affidavit are not forthcoming, these shortcoming would not defeat the rights of the respective parties. It is only a technical objection raised on behalf of the respondents and petitioners.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners has filed two supplementary affidavits dated 29.03.2025 along with the document authorizing Sushil Kumar Daga by means of resolution dated 23.07.2014. In the light of this document one has to draw inference that Sushil Kumar Daga has been authorized. However, proprietorship of first petitioner the third supplementary has been filed on behalf of the petitioners, namely, Swapan Kumar Roy who is stated to be the proprietor. The third supplementary affidavit on behalf of the petitioners sworn by Swapan Kumar Roy cannot substitute affidavit supporting the writ petition dated 10.03.2015. These are all trivial issues which can be rectified by directing the respective parties to file a fresh affidavits/counter affidavit. Patna High Court CWJC No.4165 of 2015(31) dt.03-04-2025 3/3
5. In this respect both the parties are hereby directed to file a fresh affidavit in a manner known to the law before the next date of hearing.
6. Re-list this matter on 01.05.2025.
(P. B. Bajanthri, J) ( Alok Kumar Sinha, J) Prakash Narayan U