Prem Pharmaceuticals Vs. Cce and anr.

.....it cannot be said in a hyper-technical manner that an order passed in a writ petition, if there is assail to the order emerging from the inferior tribunal or subordinate courts has to be treated all the time for all purposes to be under article 227 of the constitution of india. it would depend upon the real nature of the order passed by the learned single judge. the pleadings also assume immense significance. it would not be an over emphasis to state that an order in a writ petition can fit into the subtle contour of articles 226 and 227 of the constitution in a composite manner and they can co-inside, co-exist, overlap or imbricate. in this context it is apt to note that there may be cases where the single judge may feel disposed or inclined to issue a writ to do full and complete justice because it is to be borne in mind that article 226 of the constitution is fundamentally a repository and reservoir of justice based on equity and good conscience. it will depend upon factual matrix of each case. dr. jaidev siddha v. jaiprakash siddha, 2007(2) mpjr (fb) 361: air 2007 mp 269 (fb) is not impliedly overruled in view of dismissal of slp preferred against order reported in rama and company v. state of madhya pradesh [2007 (2) mpjr 229 (db) (mp)]. orderdeepak varma, j.1. on consent, parties were heard on merits.2. this petition under article 226/227 has been filed by the petitioner challenging the order passed by commissioner (appeals) in petitioner's appeal on 6/8th jan. 1997 rejecting the petitioner's application filed under section 35f of central excise act, 1944. submission of petitioner is that it had made out a prima facie case for grant of interim stay and had also mentioned about the financial status of the petitioner but these grounds have not been considered.3. i have perused the impugned order passed in appeal by which petitioner's application filed under section 35f of central excise act has been rejected. the grounds mentioned and canvassed before me have been considered by the appellate authority. i find no jurisdictional error. consequently the petition is hereby dismissed but if the petitioner makes an application before the appellate authority for early hearing of the appeal on merits, out of turn, then the authority may consider the same. no order is made as to costs of this petition.