Heard Sri P.S. Soman Pulladan, the petitioner’s counsel and Smt. M.M. Jasmin, the learned Government Pleader for the respondents.
2. The petitioner challenges Ext.P5 order made under Section 129 of KSGST Act. Ext.P5 is an appealable order. The petitioner by furnishing Bank Guarantee has obtained release of goods intercepted and detained by the authorities under Section 129. The learned Counsel for the petitioner seeks indulgence to file appeal and work out the remedies within the four corners of law against the order impugned in the writ petition.
3. The objection of the learned Government Pleader is that instead of availing the remedy of appeal, the writ petition is filed without showing one or the other circumstance which attracts jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of Constitution of India and hence the writ petition is untenable.
4. Keeping in view the submissions of counsel for the petitioner, without expressing a view on merits, the writ petition is dismissed. All contentions available against Ext.P5 are preserved and dismissal of the writ petition shall not be understood as this Court expressing any view on the merits raised by the petitioner on Ext.P5.
5. The petitioner apprehends encashment of Bank Guarantee even before the appeal is filed against Ext.P5. To maintain status quo as on date vis-à-vis the Bank Guarantee and also to enable the petitioner to effectively pursue the remedy of appeal, there shall be stay of encashment of Bank Guarantee for two weeks from today. The petitioner in the meantime avails the remedy of appeal and also given liberty to move for stay of Ext.P5. The appellate authority disposes of the stay application moved in this behalf within the two week period for which the stay of encashment of Bank Guarantee is granted.