[2025:RJ-JP:20476-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1064/2025 Grover Stainless Private Limited, Through Its Director Ashok Grover, Registered Office At A-1, Chopanki Industrial Area, Riico Bhiwadi, Dist. Alwar, Rajasthan. ----Petitioner Versus 1. Government Of India, Ministry Of Finance, Department Of Revenue, Through The Chief Commissioner Of Customs (Preventive), New Custom House, Near I.g.i. Airport, New Delhi-110037. 2. The Commissioner Of Customs (Preventive), Jodhpur, Hqrs At N.c.r. Building, Statue Circle, C-Scheme, Jaipur- 302005. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Jitendra Mitrucka For Respondent(s) : Mr. Ajay Shukla with Mr. Raghav Sharma HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MUKESH RAJPUROHIT Order 15/05/2025 1. Heard. 2. The grievance of the petitioner is that though no proceedings have been drawn against it, some proceedings were drawn against its tenant by the Customs Department way back in the year 2023 and the goods which belong to the tenants were seized and placed in the custody of the landlord by drawing a supurdginama on 09.06.2023. Since then the seized articles have remained in the premises of the petitioner and despite several representations given to the respondents authority to remove the seized articles, [2025:RJ-JP:20476-DB] (2 of 2) [CW-1064/2025] no steps have been taken so far. Because of the space occupied by the seized articles in the premises owned by the petitioner, the petitioner is unable to use its premises either for letting purposes or for other requirements. He would further submit that since the materials are given on supurdginama without providing any security personnel, the petitioner is finding it difficult to take care and theft committed on more than one occasion has been reported to the authority. 3. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that the representations which have been made by the petitioner in the past as also its requests for removal of the seized articles to any other premises, shall be considered by the authority and appropriate measures would be taken to ensure that the seized articles are removed from the premises of the petitioner within a period of one month. 4. In view of the above, the petition, at this stage, is disposed of. Pending application, if any, also stands disposed of. (MUKESH RAJPUROHIT),J (MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA),CJ KAMLESH KUMAR-RAHUL/7