The petitioner's choice to pursue an appeal before the appellate authority precluded seeking relief from the court on the grounds of jurisdiction and abuse of process of law.

Prakash Tatia, J.-Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner.

2. The petitioner was served with a notice (Annexure 5) under Section 68H(1) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short the "Act"). The petitioner challenged the said notice by filing writ petition before this Court being S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2399/2000. Vide order dated 16.08.2000, notices were issued to the respondents to show cause as to why the writ petition may not be admitted and an interim order was passed that if any order is passed during the pendency of the petition, it shall be subject to the decision of the writ petition.

3. It will be worthwhile to mention here that the petitioner submitted a second stay petition as the competent authority passed the order on 14.08.2000 forfeiting the petitioners property. In the writ petition this Court passed an interim order to maintain status quo. Before that, the competent authority decided the case of the petitioner finally on 11.08.2000.

4. On 18.03.2002, the petitioner sought permission to withdraw the writ petition with liberty to pursue the remedy in accordance with law. The writ petition was, therefore, dismissed as withdrawn with liberty.

5. According to learned Counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner sought liberty because of the fact that after the notice dated 11.02.2000, the competent authority passed the final order and, therefore, the petitioner in hope that he will get relief in appeal, withdrew the said writ petition and preferred appeal before the Appellate Tribunal for Forfeiture of Property, New Delhi. Copy of appeal is also placed on record as Annexure 11. In appeal, on application of the petitioner seeking permission for admission of additional evidence, the Appellate Tribunal allowed time to the competent authority to file comments. After considering the comments of the Additional Commissioner to the admission of the additional evidence, the appellate authority by order dated 211.2001, directed competent authority to submit finding on the basis of evidence already on record within a period of two months from the date of order. While remitting the matter, the appellate authority directed the competent authority to give an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners Counsel. In the order dated 211.2001, the appellate authority further observed that, "Though it is not mandatory to furnish the copy of the reasons recorded, we have held in several appeals that it would be prudent to serve the copy of the reasons recorded on the affected person." The competent authority also showed his no objection so far as giving of copy of reasons to the petitioner was concerned. In this manner, the matter was remanded to the competent authority. Copy of reasons were supplied to the petitioner.

6. The petitioner submitted one more application for admitting certain documents in evidence before the competent authority on 25.05.2004 (Annexure 14). The petitioner prayed that the documents mentioned in the application may be admitted as additional evidence before the appeal is argued. The appellate authority considered the petitioners said application and thereafter vide order dated 01.09.2004 (Annexure 15) directed the competent authority to give his finding on the additional evidence within three months. Copies of additional evidence accepted by the appellate authority were directed to be sent to the competent authority.

7. It appears from application Annexure 16 that after narrating all the facts about documents which were sought to be produced by the petitioner or the documents which are relied upon by the petitioner before the competent authority, the competent authority prayed that permission may be granted to summon the creditors as mentioned in the application and time may be extended for completing proceeding and for giving findings after investigating the facts.

8. It will be worthwhile to mention here that in the application (Annexure 16). submitted by the competent