Lotus Chacolate Company Ltd & Anr. v. Union of India

Oral order: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice Goda Raghuram) Heard Sri B.Sudhakar Reddy, learned counsel for respondents 1 and 2 and Sri A.Rajashekar Reddy, learned counsel for respondents 3 to 5. The writ petition is filed assailing a communication dated 22-3- 2012 issued by the 2nd respondent, whereunder the petitioner is informed that the consignment imported by it was inspected by the said respondent on 21-3-2012 for drawing the samples and it was observed that the sample did not meet the labelling requirements under Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 and the Rules and Regulations made thereunder and the guidelines therefor and hence the samples would not be drawn for analysis, the reasons set out communication; and in substance the show-cause notice dated 4-5- 2012 issued by the 4th respondent calling upon the petitioner to show- cause why the subject goods imported by the petitioner should not be confiscated under Section 111(d) of the Customs Act, 1962 read with the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 and 2011 Regulations thereunder and penalty be not imposed under Section 112 (a) of the Customs Act, 1962. Except for the fact that the petitioner has its registered office in Andhra Pradesh at Hyderabad, none of the respondent is situate in Andhra Pradesh nor has any part of cause of action arisen within the territory of Andhra Pradesh. Faced with this piquant situation, the learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner would like to withdraw the writ petition with liberty to pursue an appropriate remedy before the Court or Forum having territorial jurisdiction in the matter. In view of the submission on behalf of the petitioner, the writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to the petitioner to pursue appropriate remedies in the appropriate Court or Forum having jurisdiction, as the case may be. There shall be no order as to costs. 8th June, 2012 GRR __________________________ GODA RAGHURAM, J _________________________ NOUSHAD ALI, J