JUDGMENT S.D. Agarwala, J.
1. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and Sri. V.K. Singh, learned Senior Standing Counsel for the Union of India. In the instant case two orders were passed by the Additional Collector, Central Excise, Kanpur, one on 30.7.1991 and the other on 1.8.1991 demanding duty and penalty from the petitioner. Against both these orders, the petitioner filed appeals before the Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi. The petitioner also filed applications for stay of the demand made by the impugned orders. In these appeals, the Tribunal has fixed 29.1.1992 and 13.2.1992 for disposal of the stay applications.
2. The grievance of the petitioner is that before the disposal of the stay applications, the Superintendent, Central Excise Range-II, Agra has attached its goods seeking recovery of the amount demanded from it by the orders dated 30.7.1991 and 1.8.1991. Since the petitioner had already filed appeals against the impugned orders along with stay applications and the stay applications are still pending, we think that the action of the Superintendent, Central Excise seeking recovery of the amount demanded is wholly unjustified. The recovery proceedings should have been remained stayed till the disposal of the stay application.
3. The petitioner has further stated in the petition that its goods had been attached and they are likely to be auctioned soon. In the interests of justice, we consequently, direct that till the disposal of the stay applications which are fixed for 29.1.1992 and 13.2.1992, the goods of the petitioner shall remain attached but shall not be auctioned. In case the stay applications of the petitioner are dismissed then the authorities shall take action for auction of the goods.
4. With the above directions, the writ petition is dismissed.