The communication of an order to a person within the territorial jurisdiction of a High Court can constitute a part of the cause of action for setting aside that order, giving the High Court jurisdiction to entertain a writ petition challenging the order.

S.K. Mal Lodha, J.-These are eight writ petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and can be conveniently disposed of by a s ingle judgment as they have been heard together and the questions involved in all of them are the same.

2. It will suffice to state the facts in Writ Petition No. 1961 of 1970. The petitioner in connection with its business of manufacture of Aluminium Conductor Steel Reinforced and all Aluminium Conductors imported Electrolytic Grade Aluminium Wire Rods which were not extruded from outside India. One such consignment was imported under Bill of Entry No. 2431, dated July 7, 1965. The consignment consisted of 9.165 M. T. of Electrolytic Grade Aluminium Wire of 90% to 99.5% purity and 3” diameter. These goods were cleared from the Customs at Bombay and at the time of clearance, the Assistant Collector (Principal Appraiser) Customs, Bombay levied duties as under- Customs Duty 16 1/2% Countervailing Duty Rs. 396 per M.T.

3. The petitioner paid the above duties. The petitioner has no grievance so far as the payment of customs duty at 16% on the above consignment is concerned but according to the petitioner, the countervailing duty at Rs. 396 per M.T. was levied and collected by the Assistant Collector (Principal Appraiser) Customs, Bombay on a mistaken impression that it was leviable under Section 2A of the Indian Tariff Act, 1936 (hereinafter to be referred to as ‘the Act’) in respect of these goods and this being a bilateral mistake, neither the department nor the petitioner disputed this levy. The petitioner has submitted Bill of Entry dated July 7, 1965 with the writ petition and that has been marked Exhibit 1. The petitioner further states that the Collector of Customs issued a public notice No. 170/67, dated October 15, 1967 containing the decision of the Central Board of Excise and Customs with regard to the levy of countervailing duty on Electrolytic Grade Aluminium Wire Rods and clarified that Electcolytic Grade Aluminium Wire Rods other than extruded are not covered by any of the items in the Central Excise Tariff and as such, they are not on import, leviable to additional duty under Section 2A of the Act. The public notice relied upon by the petitioner runs as follows: -“Public Notice No. 170/67:-Sub : No. 3 countervailing duty-E.C. Grade Aluminium wire rods, other than extruded levy of additional duty under Section 2A of the Indian Tariff Act. The decision of the Central Board of Excise and Customs on the above subject is reproduced below for information of Importer, Clearing Agents and the Public: -“E. C. Grade Aluminium Wire Rods, other than extruded are not covered by any of the items in the Central Excise Tariff and accordingly they are not, on import, liable to additional duty under Section 2A of the Indian Tariff Act.” [Letter No. F. 16/16/67-Cus. l(pt) dated 15th September, 1967 from Central Board of Excise and Customs, New Delhi.]

Sd/- B. Sen Collector of Customs.

C. 11/402/67-A Customs House Madras dated 15-10-67

Sd/- K.J. Raman Assistant Collector of Customs.”

4. As soon as, and immediately after the petitioner became aware of the aforesaid public notice, it preferred its claim on December 25, 1967 before the Principal Appraiser of Customs for the refund of the countervailing duty at Rs. 396/-per-M.T. in respect of 9-165 M.T. which was collected by the Assistant Collector (Principal Appraiser) Customs, Bombay and paid by the petitioner under a mistake as no such duty was leviable in law. The Principal Appraiser of Customs considered the claim of the petitioner and by his order dated January 30, 1968, despatched on January 31, 1968 and received by the petitioner on February 3, 1968 rejected the claim holding that the application for the refund of duty was time barred under Section 27(1) of the Customs Act, 1962 (for short, ‘the Customs Act’) as the same was not received within six months from the date of payment

i.e. July7, 1965. The order of the Principal Appraiser