Facts of the Case

Aseem N., the petitioner, filed Writ Petition (C) No. 13360 of 2023 before the Kerala High Court against the Joint Commissioner of Customs (Preventive), the Assistant Commissioner of Customs (Customs Preventive Division, functioning out of GST Bhavan, Thiruvananthapuram), the Station House Officer, Venjaramoodu, and the Regional Passport Officer, Thiruvananthapuram.

The specific relief sought and the underlying facts of the grievance are not detailed in the order itself, beyond the array of respondents indicating a Customs/DGGI-related matter possibly connected to passport-related restrictions.

When the writ petition came up for admission on 2 June 2023, counsel for the petitioner submitted that it may be dismissed as not pressed.

Issues Involved

  1. Whether the writ petition should be dismissed given the petitioner's own submission that it was not being pressed.

Petitioner's Arguments

  • Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the writ petition may be dismissed as not pressed, without elaborating on the underlying grievance or reasons for not pressing it.

Respondent's Arguments

  • The respondents included Customs Preventive authorities (represented by Senior Counsel for GST Intelligence/DGGI) and the Regional Passport Officer; no substantive counter-submissions are recorded as the matter did not proceed to a contest on merits.

Court Order / Findings

  • The Court recorded the petitioner's counsel's submission and dismissed the writ petition as not pressed.
  • No reasoning was recorded on the merits of whatever grievance the petitioner originally had against the Customs Preventive or passport authorities.

Important Clarification

This order provides no substantive guidance on any legal question — Customs, GST or otherwise — because the petitioner chose not to press the case. The reference to 'GST Bhavan' in the address of the Customs Preventive office is purely a location detail; the matter itself concerned Customs preventive/DGGI action, not any GST-law dispute.

Sections Involved

  • Customs Act, 1962 — the statute under which the Customs Preventive authorities were acting, based on the array of parties.
  • Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 226, under which the writ petition was filed.

Decision – In Favour of

Disposed of against the petitioner in form (dismissed) but purely on his own choice not to press it — no decision on merits was rendered.

Case Details

  • Court: High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam
  • Case No.: WP(C) No. 13360 of 2023
  • Coram: Justice C.S. Dias
  • Date of Order: 2 June 2023

Link to Download the Order

Click here to view/download the full order

Disclaimer

This content is shared strictly for general information and knowledge purposes only. Readers should independently verify the information from reliable sources. It is not intended to provide legal, professional, or advisory guidance. The author and the organisation disclaim all liability arising from the use of this content. The material has been prepared with the assistance of AI tools.