' The petition was admitted to hearing and notices were issued to respondents, who have appeared and contested petition. The learned counsel for the petitioner in support of the petition argued that similar consignments of others have been cleared by the Customs while the consignment of the petitioner has not been assessed, therefore, the action of the respondents is illegal being discriminatory. It is added that since no order has been passed and assessment made, therefore, the petitioner has no remedy in the Customs hierarchy.
2. On the other hand the learned counsel for the respondent has pointed out that earlier the petitioner had disowned these consignments. In this behalf he has referred to the Annexure 'A' with the written statement.
2. I have given my anxious consideration to the arguments and gone through the record. The petitioner has filed a re-joinder to the written statement submitted by the respondents. The petitioner therein although alleged that the letter Annexure 'A' with the written statement was written under threats by the Customs Intelligence yet the letter is admitted. The petitioner admittedly did not plead this fact in the writ petition. This way he has not invoked the Constitutional jurisdiction with clean hands, therefore, not entitled to any relief. Moreover, it is a factual controversy whether the alleged letter disowning the consignments was written under threats or not. It is not a proper forum to determine the legality of the letter.
3. The upshot of this discussion is that this petition is dismissed, however, there is no order as to costs.