Disposed

Ms Ola Cell Technologies Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India & Ors.

Delhi HC13 Jul 2026W.P.(C)/9268/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged a customs Order-in-Original and sought direction on its pending representation. The court held that an appeal under the Customs Act was available and that personal hearing and written submissions had been duly considered; pendency of a representation did not justify bypassing the statutory remedy. Writ petition disposed of with liberty to file an appeal and seek exclusion of

What the court decided

AI extract

Ms Ola Cell Technologies Pvt. Ltd. Vs Union of India & Ors. — Customs and Excise | Delhi HC (2026)

¶1

$~134

¶2

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- W.P.(C) 9268/2026, CM APPL. 43388/2026, CM APPL. 43389/2026 and CM APPL. 43390/2026

¶4

MS OLA CELL TECHNOLOGIES PVT LTD .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Sujit Ghosh, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Bhava Sharma, Mr. Ashray Bhura, Advs.

¶5

versus

¶6

UNION OF INDIA & ORS. .....Respondents

¶7

Through: Ms. Uma Prasuna Bachu, SPC for UOI.

¶8

CORAM:

¶9

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KSHETARPAL HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SHAIL JAIN

O R D E R

13.07.2026

The present Writ Petition has been filed by the Petitioner

¶14

seeking the following prayers:

¶15

“i. Issue a writ of Mandamus, a writ in the nature of Mandamus, or any other writ, order or direction to direct Respondent No. 2 to decide and dispose the Petitioner’s Representation dated 18.05.2026 in a time-bound manner and in accordance with law;

¶16

ii. Issue a writ of Certiorari, a writ in the nature of Certiorari, or any other writ, order or direction calling for the records of the Impugned Order-in-Original No. 118720/2026 dated 13.04.2026 passed by Respondent No. 3 and quashing the same as being illegal, without jurisdiction and perverse and also violative of Articles 14 and 265 of the Constitution.”

¶17

Admittedly, an appeal against the Impugned Order passed on 13.04.2026 is maintainable under the provisions of the Customs Act, 1962.

¶18

A perusal of the Impugned Order dated 13.04.2026 shows that not only the Petitioner was given opportunity of personal hearing, but

¶19

This is a digitally signed order.

¶20

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 15/07/2026 at 12:03:41

¶21

also its written submissions were also duly considered. The Petitioner cannot, therefore, claim that it has not been granted opportunity of personal hearing or the Impugned Order has been passed in violation of principles of natural justice, so as to invoke the writ jurisdiction without availing the alternative remedy of appeal.

¶22

Learned senior counsel representing the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner’s representation dated 18.05.2026 is pending in the office of Director General of Trade Remedies, New Delhi.

¶23

However, the pendency of the aforesaid representation does not furnish a ground to bypass the statutory remedy available against the impugned Order.

¶24

Since an adjudicatory order has already been passed by the Competent Authority, the Petitioner, if so advised, may avail the comprehensive and efficacious statutory remedy of appeal against the said order.

¶25

With these observations, the present Writ Petition is disposed of. The pending applications also stand closed.

¶26

It shall be open to the Petitioner to seek exclusion of the period spent in prosecuting the present Writ Petition while filing the appeal. Any such application shall be considered by the Appellate Authority in accordance with law.

¶27

ANIL KSHETARPAL, J.

¶28

SHAIL JAIN, J.

¶29

JULY 13, 2026 jai/ad

¶30

This is a digitally signed order.

¶31

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 15/07/2026 at 12:03:41

Ms Ola Cell Technologies Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Ms Ola Cell Technologies Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Maninder Singh Vs Bank of India

Dinesh Solanki & Anr. Vs Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Suresh Singhal Vs Muncipal Corporation of Delhi & Ors.

Prabhjit Singh Sarna Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi & Ors.

M/S Shah Caters Vs Archeological Survey of India

Cloud 9 Prjoects Private Limited Vs Anubhav Gupta & Ors.

Pradeep Kumar Vs Union of India & Ors.

Raja Rajeshwari Institute of Medical Sciences Girls Vs Union of India and Ors.

Ssapp Overseas Private Limited Vs Additional Commissioner and Ors.

Gm Enterprises Vs Parvesh Gupta

Chandan Pharmacy Ltd. Vs Uma Shankar Sahney

M/S Super Traders Vs Principal Commissioner, Dgst, Delhi & Anr.

M/S Karamsar Poultry Appliances Vs Assistant Commissioner, Janakpuri Division, Cgst Delhi West & Ors.

Maya Papers Vs Union of India & Anr.