' JAWAID NAWAZ KHAN GANDAPUR, J.---Briefly stated the facts' of the case are that the petitioner industry namely, M/s. Ampake Pipe Industry (Pvt.) Ltd., situated at Industrial Estate, Hayatabad, Peshawar, is engaged in manufacturing P.V.C. Pipes. The raw material which is consumed by the said industry, when imported, is stored in the private Bonded Warehouse, established/located within the premises of the industry. The petitioner had imported requisite raw material for consumption and stored the same in its bonded warehouse. The same was released by the Customs Authorities, on payment of customs duties etc., as and when required by the petitioner.
The customs duty was duly deposited in the Bank.
2. It appears that the stock, stored in the approved bonded warehouse, was checked by the Customs Authorities. On checking it transpired that only 750 bags of P.V.C. Resin, imported from Saudi Arabia, were available in godown while the rest of the goods had been consumed by the petitioner, as admitted by the, management, without the payment of the customs duty. Since no customs duty had been paid in respect of the consumed raw material, therefore, a show-cause notice was issued to the petitioner for having misused the Safe Transportation Scheme facilities and for having contravened the provisions of sections 97, 104, 116, 156(1) 57 to 59, 61 and 62 of the Customs Act, 1969, read with sections 3 and 6 of the Sales Tax Act, 1990 for having evaded the Government revenue to the extent of Rs,29,40,105. The petitioner was asked to show-cause as to why the evaded amount of Rs,29,40,105 be not recovered from him and additionally as to why penal action, as provided under the law, be not initiated against it
3. The petitioner submitted his reply to the Collector, Customs and Central Excise, Peshawar who vide his order, dated 9-7-1997 recorded the following order, which has been impugned:--- 'I have examined the record of the case and taken into consideration the written and verbal arguments of the learned defence counsel. During the stock taking conducted on 17-3-1997 it was found that the goods had been removed without payment of customs duty and taxes. Only an amount of Rs,10,61,755 was paid on 13-5-1997 i,e,, almost after two months of the detection of the case. The contention of the respondents that they had been removing the goods without payment of duty, in connivance with the customs staff does not absolve them of their wrong doings and liabilities. The case is fully established against the respondents. The respondents are directed to immediately deposit the balance amount of customs duty and taxes amounting to Rs,18,78,150 into Government treasury. In addition, a penalty of Rs,20,00,000 (rupees twenty lacs) only is also imposed on the party for violation of sections 97, 104, 106 and 116 of the Customs Act, 1969.
' This order consists of five pages and each page duly bears my initial and office stamp."
4. The petitioner accordingly challenged the abovementioned order before the Appellate Tribunal, Customs, Central Excise and Sales Tax Islamabad (Bench Islamabad) on 2-9-1997. The petitioner's appeal was admitted and was adjourned to 28-10-1997 for hearing.
5. The petitioner, in the meantime, without waiting for the final verdict of the said Tribunal has filed this Constitutional petition and challenged the order of the Collector, dated 9-7-1997, before us.
6. The learned counsel for the petitioner heard. We have also gone through the record of the case carefully.
7. It may be stated at the very outset that we have not been able to understand as to why the petitioner has filed this Constitutional petition. He should have waited for the verdict of the Appellate Tribunal, duly constituted, under the law, and competent to decide the appeal.
8. We may observe here that the rule of exhaustion of statutory remedies, before embarking on writ jurisdiction, is well-settled and compliance with this rule is, therefore, necessary not only to allow/permit the statutory functionaries to perform the duties, assigned to them, but is also essential for avoiding over- congestion of frivolous cases/petitions in the High Court.
9. At the moment, we are of the opinion that the petitioner has not come to us with clean hands and since there is serious doubt about his bona fides in filing this petition, therefore, we decline to exercise the Constitutional jurisdiction, discretionary in nature, in his favour and put a stamp of belief to his belief that his appeal would be kept in cold storage or that a decision adverse to him would be made.
10. The petitioner may, if so advised, invoke the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court as and when he has exhausted the already available remedy to him i,e,, after the matter pending disposal in the Appellate Tribunal is finally decided.
11. This petition has no substance and is accordingly dismissed in limine alongwith Civil Miscellaneous.