Bombay High Court
DILKUSH BABEL SON OF ANNARAJ BABELversusUNION OF INDIA THR CENTRAL GOVT AND ANR
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
Holding
The writ petition is disposed of, with the petitioner directed to file a statutory appeal under the Customs Act without limitation objection.
Summary
The petitioner, Dilkhush Babel, challenged an order that allegedly failed to consider his reply to a show‑cause notice, alleging a breach of natural justice. The respondents relied on a prior decision in Ankush Jain v. Union of India (Writ Petition No.2632 of 2026) which addressed identical contentions. The Court examined the earlier precedent and found that the same reasoning applied, leading to the dismissal of the present writ petition. However, the Court granted the petitioner liberty to file a statutory appeal under the Customs Act within three weeks, expressly waiving any limitation objection due to his bona‑fide pursuit of the writ. All parties' contentions were kept open for consideration on the merits of the appeal.
Issues considered
- What constitutes a breach of natural justice when a reply to a show‑cause notice is not considered?
- Whether the petitioner should be directed to pursue a statutory appeal under the Customs Act instead of the writ remedy.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- natural justice
- show cause notice
- statutory appeal
- Customs Act
- writ petition
- limitation
- High Court of Bombay
Judgment
2026:BHC-AS:33827-DB
Bhogale 11.wp-10235-2026.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.10235 OF 2026
Dilkhush Babel … Petitioner
Versus
Union of India and ors. .… Respondents
****
Adv. Brijesh Pathak a/w Adv. Anjali Joshi, Adv. Dulraj Jain, for the
petitioner.
Adv. Karan Adik a/w Adv. Sangeeta Yadav, for the respondents.
****
CORAM : M. S. KARNIK &
SANDESH D. PATIL, JJ.
DATE : 17th AUGUST 2026
P.C. :
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner was at pains to point
out that none of the contentions in the reply to the show cause
notice have been dealt with by the authority as can be seen from
the impugned order in original. It is submitted that this is in
breach of the principles of natural justice. Learned counsel for the
respondents invited our attention to the order dated 05/03/2026
passed by this Court in Ankush Jain vs. Union of India and others
1
Bhogale 11.wp-10235-2026.odt
in Writ Petition No.2632 of 2026. We have perused the order.
The very same stand taken by the petitioner in this writ petition
was the subject matter of consideration in Ankush Jain (supra).
What is under challenge is the order in original also in respect of
the petitioner.
3. In such view of the matter, for the same reasons as in
Ankush Jain (supra), the present writ petition is also disposed of.
The writ petition is accordingly disposed of with liberty to the
petitioner to avail the statutory remedy of appeal as provided
under the Customs Act. Let such appeal be filed within a period of
three weeks and the same be considered on its own merits,
without raising an objection as to limitation for the reason that the
petitioner was bonafide pursuing the present writ petition.
4. All contentions of the parties are expressly kept open.
5. The writ petition is disposed of.
(SANDESH D. PATIL, J.) (M. S. KARNIK, J.)
Signed by: Pradnya Bhogale
Designation: PA To Honourable Judge
Date: 17/08/2026 17:24:35 2
Checking your session…