' Through this petition, the petitioner has impugned seizure of vehicle bearing Registration No, LEB- 07-2858 and implementation of Order-in-Original No, 131/2012 dated 18.10.2012 passed by the Additional Collector Customs (Adjudication), Customs House, Sambrial.
2. The case of the petitioner is that he is driver of aforesaid vehicle. On 15.3.2012 the staff of Respondent No, 1 intercepted the said vehicle and seized the same under Section 160 of the Customs Act, 1969 (Act of 1969). The petitioner was issued a show-cause notice where-after a detailed order was passed on 18.10.2012. The said order required 166 bottles of foreign origin liquor to be confiscated. It did not require the vehicle of the petitioner to be confiscated. The petitioner moved an application for the return of the vehicle however no positive action was taken by the stated respondent. Hence this petition.
3. Report and parawise comments have been filed by the Respondents. Learned counsel for the respondents stated that subsequent to the Order-in-Original dated 18.10.2012, a corrigendum was issued by the Government of Pakistan on 20.10.2012 correcting the fourth row of Para 19 of the Order-in-Original such that "I, therefore, order its outright confiscation" may be read as "I, therefore, order its outright confiscation alongwith with the seized vehicle". Learned counsel stated that in view of this corrigendum the vehicle has been sized being illegal and is subject matter of FIR No, 02/2012 dated 14.3.2012 registered under Section 156(1), (89) read with Section 2 (S), 157, 169 of the Act of 1969.
4. Heard. Record perused.
5. The basic issue before this Court is that Order-in-Original was amended through a corrigendum issued under Section 206 of the Act of 1969., Section 206 of the Act of 1969 provides that clerical or arithmetical errors in any decision or order passed by the Federal Government, the Board or any officer of customs under this Act, or errors arising therein from accidental slip or omission may, at any time, be corrected by the Federal Government, the Board or such officer of customs or his successor-in-office, as the case' may be. In the instant case, the correction is neither clerical nor arithmetical. In this case a substantive change has been brought about by ordering for the confiscation of the Petitioner's vehicle. This is a patent illegality, which has been committed by the Respondents.
6. Therefore, this petition is accepted and the substantive change made by the Respondent through corrigendum dated 20.10.2012 is set-aside. So far as any other proceedings pending pursuant to FIR No, 2/2012 is concerned, the same is a separate issue which shall be dealt with in accordance with law by the competent authority.