Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Item No. Ml-1222 vs Snandy on 8 July, 2014
Author: Harish Tandon
Bench: Harish Tandon
1
WP 10480 (W) of 2012
08.07.2014
Court No. 14
Multicon Exports (P) Ltd. & Anr.
Item No. ML-1222 Vs.
snandy
The Certificate Officer & Ors.
(DISPOSED OF)
Mr. Samyajit Dasgupta, Advocate
Mr. Subhas Jana, Advocate
Mr. Basudeb Biswas, Advocate
......for the Petitioners
Mr. R. Bhardwaj, Advocate
......for the Respondents
The adjudication was made under the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 (FERA) but before the challenge to the said order is made, the said Act was replaced by promulgation of Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999 (FEMA). Sections 17 and 19 of the FEMA provides an appeal to the Special Director (Appeals) and the Appellate Tribunal respectively. The petitioner approached the Special Director (Appeals) and filed an application for stay of the recovery proceeding. It is alleged in this writ- petition that the Appellate Authority opined orally that it is not empowered to take up the said appeal as the question relating to the maintainability of the proceeding filed before him in respect of the allegation made under FEMA, is pending before the Apex Court.
It is undisputed that such observation is not recorded in an order passed by the State Appellate Authority. 2 Mr. Bhardwaj, learned Advocate for the department submits that the aforesaid allegations of the petitioner are unfounded so long the authority did not pass an order in this regard.
In vie w of the above stand taken by the respective counsels, this Court feels that the Appellate Authority before whom the appeal is filed by the petitioner, should take up the application as well as the appeal and should record his observation on the maintainability of the said appeal as alleged by the petitioner in this writ-petition. The entire exercise shall be completed by the said authority within three weeks from the date of communication of this order. There shall be an interim order restraining the department or the Certificate Officer from taking any coercive steps against the petitioner for a period of four weeks from date or until further order that may be passed by the appellate authority.
With these observations, the writ-petition is disposed of. No order as to costs.
(Harish Tandon, J) 3 4 ` 5