JUDGMENT

AHMADI, J.—(for himself and on behalf of M. M. Punchhi, J.) :- We have had the benefit of the industry, erudition and exposition of the constitutional and jurisprudential aspects of law on the various questions urged before us in the judgment of our esteemed Brother K. Ramaswamy, J. But while concurring with the hereinafter mentioned conclusions recorded by him we would like to say a few words to explain our points of view. Since the facts have been set out in detail by our learned Brother we would rest content by giving an abridged preface which we consider necessary.

2. It all began with the receipt of a letter dated December 26, 1991, from Shri R. K. Jain, Editor, Excise Law Times, addressed to the then Chief Justice of India, Shri M. H. Kania, J., complaining that as the Customs, Excise and Gold Control Appellate Tribunal (for short the CEGAT) was without a President for the last over six months the functioning of the Tribunal was adversely affected, in that, the Benches sit for hardly two hours or so, the sittings commence late at about 10.50 a.m., there is a tendency to 1774 adjourn cases on one pretext or the. other so much so that even passing of interim orders, lik