JUDGMENT :

M.R. Shah, J.

By way of this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have prayed for an appropriate writ, order and/or direction striking down Section 32F(6) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") thereby holding and declaring that settlement proceedings shall not abate even if the Settlement Commission did not pass within time limit specified under Section 32F(6) a final order setting the case in respect of application filed on or after the 1st day of June, 2007.

The petitioners have also further prayed for an appropriate writ, order and/or direction quashing and setting aside the order No.01/Final Order/CEX/KNA/2012 made by the Settlement Commission, Bombay on 3/1/2012 thereby directing the Settlement Commission to consider and decide settlement application No. SA(E)440 of 2010 filed by the petitioners for settlement of case arising out of Show Cause Notice F.No.D.G.C.E.I./AZU/12(4)19/2007-08 dated 8/1/2010 issued by the Additional Director General, D.G.C.E.I., Zonal Unit, Ahmedabad, on merits.

2. That the petitioner No.1 is a Partnership Firm (hereinafter referred to as "the petitioner"). The petitioner No.2 is Partner of the petitioner No.1 firm. The petitioner firm is engaged in the business of manufacture of Patent of Proprietary medicines. That the petitioner firm was availing S.S.I. exemption allowed by virtue of Notification No.8/2003-CE issued by the Central Government. That the respondent No.4 initiated inquiry against the petitioners in the month of July, 2007. That the petitioners were served with the show cause notice by the respondent No.4 dated 8/1/2010, by which the petitioners were directed to show cause as to why Central Excise Duty amounting to Rs. 1,34,52,047/- towards Cenvat duty, plus education cess plus Higher Education Cess should not be demanded and recovered from them under section 11A of the Act and amount of Rs. 20,00,000/- voluntarily deposited by them during the course of investigation should not be confirmed and appropriated against the aforesaid demand of duty of Rs. 1,34,52,047/-, with interest at the prescribed rates should not be levied and recovered from them under the provisions of Section 11AB of the Act and penalty should not be imposed upon them under section 11AC of the Act and Rule 25 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 for their acts and omission and commission as mentioned in the show cause notice.

2.1. That having served with the aforesaid show cause notice, the petitioners submitted appropriate application before the Settlement Commission under section 32E of the Act in the prescribed format and after complying with all requirements as provided under section 32E of the Act. That by approaching the Settlement Commission, the petitioners accepted the duty liability to the extent of Rs.51,04,783/- as against the Central Excise duty of Rs. 1,34,52,047/- demanded in the show cause notice dated 8/1/2010. It is submitted that the said application was submitted on 18/12/2010. As per the record of the proceedings, hearing before the Settlement Commission was held on 4/5/2011. It appears that the learned advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioners submitted that they are not disputing clandestine clearance of medicaments or wrong availment of S.S.I. benefit under Notification No.8 of 2003-CE dated 1/3/2003 and that their prayer before the commission is limited to the plea that the figures of clandestine clearances of medicaments and wrong availment of S.S.I. benefit and resultant differential Central Excise duty payable as worked out by the D.G.C.E.I., as alleged in the S.C.N., are incorrect figures and that they need to be substantially revised and further that the benefit of Cenvat Credit on inputs/raw materials should be allowed to them. It appears that on 4/5/2011 Settlement Commission heard the learned advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioners as well as the representative for revenue i.e. Senior D.G.C.E.I.,