- (1.) Civil Appeal 8544/1997 : Being aggrieved by certain proceedings under the Central Excise Act, 1944 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), the appellant filed a writ petition before the High Court. The High Court after considering several circumstances arising in the matter felt that the Collector of Central Excise should exercise his powers under Section 35E of the Act and directed the Collector, Central Excise to examine the record of the proceedings of the Assistant Collector of Central Excise and pass appropriate order under Section 35E(2) of the Act. Thereafter, the concerned Collector passed an order. Against that order a writ petition was filed before the High Court and High Court held as follows : "Order passed by the Collector of Central Excise on 25-4-94 at Ex. K is passed pursuant to order passed by this Court on 3-2-94 in writ petition No. 135 of 1994 An appeal lies against the said order under Section 35B of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944. Since an alternate efficacious remedy is open to the Appellants no interference is called for in a Writ Petition." It is against this order, this appeal is preferred by special leave.
(2.) Section 35B of the Act provides for various types of orders against which an appeal can be filed to CEGAT, but an order made under Section 35E is not one against which an appeal would lie to the CEGAT. Hence, the High Court could not have stated that an appeal lies against the order in question which has been made pursuant to the orders of the High Court under Section 35E of the Act. Therefore, we set aside the order made by the High Court and remit the matter to the High Court for fresh consideration in accordance with law, restoring Writ Petition No. 3749 of 1995 to its original number.
(3.) In view of the order made above, this petition stands dismissed as having become infructuous.;