W.P.(C)/14660/2026 of M/S SAVIRAMA TRADERS Vs PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (IMPORT) & ORS. on 1 October 2026

O R D E R

%

01.10.2026 W.P.(C) 14649/2026

1. This petition is filed with the following prayer: “a) declare the Areca nut seized vide Seizure Memo dated 01.07.2026 as illegal;

b) issue an appropriate writ, order or direction, including a writ of Certiorari, quashing and setting aside impugned Order dated 04.08.2026 passed by the Joint Commissioner of Custom;

c) issue an appropriate writ, order or direction, including a writ of Mandamus, directing the Respondents to assess and permit clearance/release of the goods covered under Bill of Entry No. 9655991 dated 03.06.2026 & Bill of Entry No. 9745052 dated 08.06.2026 in accordance with law;

d) award costs of the present proceedings in favour of the Petitioner and”

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner fairly submit that in view of the earlier writ petitions filed by the petitioner challenge to the seizure cannot be pressed. The limited grievance is that the representation dated 24.09.2026 for the provisional release of the detained goods has not yet been decided.

3. Learned counsel for the respondent on advance notice relies upon the communication dated 25.09.2026 to contend that the initial FSSAI report was valid for thirty days and that period has expired. Despite reminders dated 03.09.2026 and 17.09.2026 the response from FSSAI is awaited, consequently, the application for provisional release could not be decided.

4. The initial FSSAI reports are dated 03.06.2026 and 08.06.2026. At that stage the petitioner neither sought provisional release nor challenged the seizure in this court. It was only on filing of the second writ petition when petitioner relegated to avail remedy of the provisional release, the representation dated 24.09.2026 was filed. The limited shelf life of the detained goods and the demurrage charges on day-to-day basis cannot be ignored.

5. It is pertinent to note that the petitioner had issued reminder on 24.09.2026 but there is nothing on record to show that the respondent pursued the matter with the FSSAI thereafter or brought the limited shelf life of the goods to the notice of FSSAI. The respondents are sitting tight over the matter after giving a reply on 25.09.2026 that report from FSSAI is awaited.

6. Without commenting on the merits of the matter, the petition is disposed of with the direction to the respondent to decide the representation dated 24.09.2026 within two weeks from receipt of the copy of this order. The respondent shall pursue the matter with the FSSAI for the requisite report.

7. Needless to say, the petitioner shall be at liberty to avail remedy in accordance with law if aggrieved of the decision. W.P.(C) 14660/2026

8. Learned counsel for the parties are ad-idem that the issue and the facts are similar in W.P.(C) 14649/2026. This petition is disposed of in the same terms. AVNEESH JHINGAN, J SHAIL JAIN, J OCTOBER 1, 2026/kp