The petitioner has the liberty to seek urgent or early hearing of appeals and stay application, and approach the Court if the Appellate Authority finds it difficult to hear the appeals.

Deepak Verma, J.

1. This order shall also govern disposal of Writ Petition No. 1317 of 1997 (Steel Tubes of India Ltd. v. Union of India and Ors.)

2. Petitioner's grievance is that even though it has preferred appeals under Section 35 of the Central Excise Act and has also filed application under Section 35(f) of the Act for grant of interim stay, but the appeal and the stay application are not being heard by the Appellate Authority. Further grievance is that in the meanwhile the adjudicating Authority has already issued a notice of demand annexed as P-5. Shri Neema appearing for respondents on advance copy, submitted that, it appears, that petitioner has not made any efforts before the Appellate Authority to get the appeals listed at an early date. Petitioner also does not dispute this position, but submits that in view of the fact that Commissioner of Appeals is already flooded with number of appeals, and, therefore, it may not be possible for him to hear the petitioner's appeal out of turn and especially in absence of any order of this Court.

3. However, at this stage I do not deem it fit or proper to give any direction to the respondents, but petitioner shall be at liberty to move an appropriate application for urgent or early hearing of its appeals and for consideration of its application for grant of stay. In case for some reason or the other, the Appellate Authority finds it difficult to hear the petitioner's appeal and the stay application, then the petitioner shall be at liberty to approach this Court.

4. With the above observations this petition and the connected petition stand finally disposed of but with no order as to costs.