KAN SINGH, J.—We have before us two writ petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution by Chiranjilal Shrilal Goenka, a businessman of Bombay, who had his ancestral home at Ramgarh in the State of Rajasthan. By writ petition No. 270 of 1966, he questions the validity of an order dated 4.3.66 passed by the Income-tax Officer (Central) Section X, Bombay, under sec. 132 (5) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and prays for a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction. By writ petition No. 269 of 1966, he challenges the legality of a notice issued to him on 3.2.66 by the Deputy Collector of Land Custom and Central Excise, Rajasthan, Jaipur, whereby the petitioner was called upon to show cause why the gold recovered from the petitioners premises and seized by the Excise authorities be not confiscated under Rule 126 (M) of the Defence of India Rules. In this behalf he prays for a writ of prohibition restraining the respondents from taking any further proceedings against him and also for ordering the release of seized gold and ornaments to be returned to the petitioner.

2. As the two writ petitions raise some common questions of fact and law and 5 out of 10 respondents

Click Here to Read the rest of this document