The finality of orders passed by the Appellate Tribunal, as provided in S.129B(4) of the Customs Act, precludes the maintainability of the Original Petition under Art.226, emphasizing the efficacious remedies available under the Act.

Sri. C. Kochunni Nair, Additional Central Government Standing Counsel took notice on behalf of respondents 1 to 3. The learned Government Pleader took notice on behalf of the 4th respondent.

2. Exts. P2.P3 and P5 are under challenge. Ext.P2 is an order of the first respondent, passed under S.111(d), 112(b)(1) and 119 of the Customs Act, 1962, for short, The Act, confiscating 82 bundles of smuggled goods, 58 bags of rice and imposing a penalty of Rs.1 lakh on the petitioner firm, a penalty of Rs. 1,00,000/- on Sri. K. A Ahmed and a penalty of Rs.1 lakh on Sri. K.P. Hussain.

3. Ext.P3 is the order of the Customs Appellate Tribunal dismissing the appeal (Appeal No. Cd (T) (MS) 146/80 thereby confirming Ext.P2. The petitioner then moved the Appellate Tribunal to -get the questions of law arising out of the appellate order, referred to the High Court, under S.130(1), this application was rejected. The petitioner thereupon moved this court under sub-section 3 of S.130 for an order directing the Appellate Tribunal to state the case and to refer the questions to the High Court. A Division Bench of this court by Ext.P4judgment dismissed the said application. The petition thereafter has moved this Original Petition for the following reliefs: -

(1) A writ of certiorari or any appropriate writ, order or direction quashing Exts.P2, P3 and P5.

(2) To grant such other reliefs prayed for from time to time which this Hon'ble Court deems fit.

(3) To allow cost of this proceeding.

4. The counsel for the Department submits that the Original Petition is not maintainable in view of the fact that the order of the Appellate Tribunal has become final. It is relevant in this context to note, it is further submitted, that Ext.P2 order of the Collector of Customs has got merged in the appellate order which has to be treated as finally disposing of the disputes in view of sub-section 4 of S.129B. See sub-section 4ofS.129B: -

"129B. -Orders of Appellate Tribunal.

(4) Save as otherwise provided in S.130 or S.130-E, orders passed by the Appellate/ Tribunal on appeal shall be final".

The counsel for the petitioner however, contends that the finality attached to the order of the Appellate Tribunal shall not stand in the way of his right to move the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution for appropriate reliefs. If the argument of the counsel for the Department is accepted, it comes to this namely., that sub-section 4 of S.129B would virtually be controlling the extraordinary powers of the High Court recognised under Art.226 of the Constitution, the counsel further submitted.

5. The question thus arising for consideration is: Is the Original Petition under Art.226 of the Constitution maintainable in view of the provisions contained under subsection 4 of S.129B? The answer depends upon the construction of Article 226 and the relevant Sections of the Customs Act namely., 129B(4),130 and 130-E. Sub-section 4 of S.129B, as already noted, makes the order passed by the Tribunal on appeal final subject to Ss.130 and 130-E of The Act. S.130 enables a party aggrieved by the order of the Appellate Tribunal to have the questions of law, arising out of the appellate order, referred to this court for opinion. It is not as if he has no other remedy for redressal of his grievances, in case the said application happens to be dismissed. He cantilena appeal to the Supreme Court from the judgment of the High Court delivered on a reference made under S.130 provided, on his own motion or on an oral application made by or on behalf of the aggrieved party immediately after the passing of the judgment, the High Court certifies it to be a fit one for appeal to Supreme Court. The scheme of the Act in regard to confiscation of goods improperly imported or improperly imported and secreted, but seized on search of premises where they are stocked, is such that all questions of fact are to be decided by customs authorities and on question of law ar