G.S. Sistani, J. (Oral)-The present petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ of mandamus directing respondent No.2 (Container Corporation of India Ltd.) to hand over the delivery of a consignment of Pig Bristles (imported in Container No. HDMU 2368478 (LOT No. 106)) to the petitioner as well as a writ of prohibition, restraining respondent No.2 from handing over the delivery of the said goods to any other person.

2. The facts leading to the filing of this writ petition are that a consignment of 'pig bristles' arrived at Inland Container Depot (ICD), Tuglakhabad on 11.8.2007, in Container No. HDMU 2368478. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that under Section 46 of the Customs Act, 1962 (hereinafter referred to as "the Customs Act") the importer of any goods is required to file a Bill of Entry and present it to the officer concerned in the prescribed format. Once such Bill of Entry is filed, if the goods are imported, and duty payable has been paid thereon, clearance may be given thereof under Section 47 of the Customs Act.

3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that, no Bill of Entry (hereinafter referred to as "B/E") was filed in respect of the said consignment of "pig bristles" that had arrived in the Container No. HDMU 2368478, by any person, neither was the said consignment claimed by any importer and it remained uncleared in the warehouse of respondent No.2, who was the custodian of the said goods. It is submitted that Section 48 of the Customs Act deals with procedure in cases where goods are not cleared from the warehouse or transit within 30 days after they are unloaded. Section 48 reads as under:

"Procedure in case of goods not cleared, warehoused, or transhipped within [thirty days] after unloading.-If any goods brought into India from a place outside India are not cleared for home consumption or warehoused or transhipped within [thirty days] from the date of the unloading thereof at a customs station or within such further time as the proper officer may allow or if the title to any imported goods is relinquished, such goods may, after notice to the importer and with the permission of the proper officer be sold by the person having the custody thereof:

Provided that-

(a) animals, perishable goods and hazardous goods, may, with the permission of the proper officer, be sold at any time;

(b)* * * * *"

4. Section 150 of the Customs Act deals with the procedure for sale of goods, the same reads as under:

"Procedure for sale of goods and application of sale proceeds-(1) Where any goods not being confiscated goods are to be sold under any provisions of this Act, they shall, after notice to the owner thereof, be sold by public auction or by tender or with the consent of the owner in any other manner.

(2) The proceeds of any such sale shall be applied-

(a) firstly to the payment of the expenses of the sale,

(b) next to the payment of the freight and other charges, if any, payable in respect of the goods sold, to the carrier, if notice of such charges has been given to the person having custody of the goods,

(c) next to the payment of the duty, if any, on the goods sold,

(d) next to the payment of the charges in respect of the goods sold due to the person having the custody of the goods,

(e) next to the payment of any amount due from the owner of the goods to the Central Government under the provisions of this Act or any other law relating to customs, and the balance, if any, shall be paid to the owner of the goods."

5. Counsel for the petitioner submits that respondent No.2 auctioned several consignments lying uncleared with it, to tender-cum-online auction sale, which included the goods under consignment of "pig bristles" imported under container No. HDMU 2368478 as described in the notice of auction as "General Cargo". The terms and conditions of the auction were contained in the Notice issued by respondent No.2 in this regard.

6. It is the case of the petiti