Disposed

M/S Deep Water Services(India) Ltd.,Mumbai. v. Union of India Throu'Its Secretary and 3 Ors.

Bombay HC22 Jan 2009WP/549/2004

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court declined to interfere in a writ petition challenging a show cause notice under Article 226 of the Constitution. Liberty was granted to the petitioner to submit a reply within two weeks for the respondent to pass an order thereafter.

What did the court decide?

Liberty granted to submit reply within two weeks; respondent to pass order within four weeks thereafter.

M/S Deep Water Services(India) Ltd.,Mumbai. Vs Union… — Writ and Judicial Review | Bombay HC (2009)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA

¶3

WRIT PETITION NO. 549 OF 2004

¶4

M/s. Deep Water Services (India) Ltd. a Company incorporated under Companies Act, 1956, having its registered office at Ground Floor, 134/A, Dr. A.B. Road, Worli, Mumbai 400 018.

¶5

...... Petitioner

¶6

V e r s u s

¶7

Union of India

¶8

Through its Secretary, Ministry of Finance, New Delhi.

¶9

The Deputy Commissioner

¶10

of Customs, Goa Custom House, Marmagoa, Goa.

¶11

Directorate General of Hydrocarbons,

¶12

4^th and 11^th floor, Hindustan Times House, Kasturba Gandhi Marg, New Delhi – 110 001.

¶13

Oil and Natural Gas Corporation

¶14

¶15

Limited Drilling Services, Mumbai Region 3 – B Vasudhara Bhavan, Bandra (East), Mumbai – 400 051. ...... Respondents

¶16

Mr. S. M. Singbal, Advocate for the Petitioners.

¶17

Mr. C. A. Ferreira, Asst. Solicitor General for Respondent nos. 1 and 2. Mr. M. B. Da Costa, Senior Advocate with Mr. J. A. Lobo, Advocate for Respondent nos. 3 and 4.

¶18

CORAM: SWATANTER KUMAR, C.J. & N. A. BRITTO, J.

¶19

DATE: 22nd January, 2009.

¶20

ORAL JUDGMENT:

¶21

We have heard the learned Counsel for the parties.

¶22

This Writ Petition is directed against a show cause notice dated 20.09.2004. The learned Counsel appearing for the Respondents has stated that the Petitioner was required to submit his reply duly supported by documents within seven days from the issuance of the show cause notice, which was not submitted till the date when the Petition was filed. However, subsequently, the same might have been submitted after filing of this Writ Petition. He further states that the pleas raised by the petitioner in his reply to show cause notice include the fact as to what was the effect with regard to re-export of the goods. During the course of hearing, it has

¶23

¶24

also been brought to our notice that the Petitioner has re-exported the goods.

¶25

According to the Petitioner, upon re-export of the goods, the show cause notice itself may not survive.

¶26

Without touching the merit or otherwise and without prejudice to

¶27

the rights and contentions raised, we decline to interfere in this Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The Petitioner has stated that liberty be given to him to submit his reply duly supported with documents within two weeks from today. Once this is received, the Respondent no.2 will pass an appropriate Order within four weeks thereafter.

¶28

With these directions, the Writ Petition is disposed off with no

Order as to costs.

CHIEF JUSTICE

JUDGE

arp/*

M/S Deep Water Services(India) Ltd.,Mumbai. v. Union of India Throu'Its Secretary and 3 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Deep Water Services(India) Ltd.,Mumbai. v. Union of India Throu'Its Secretary and 3 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Comunidade of Poiguinim, Poiguinim-Goa. Vs State of Goa and Anr.

M/S I.G. Petrochemicals Ltd., and 2 Ors., Vs the Union of India and 3 Ors.

Mr.Anil Gango Zangale and 3 Ors., Vs State of Goa through Its Chief Secretary and 6 Ors.

Madrasa Raza E Mustafa Thru.Mr.Sayeed H.R.Gundar Vs Govt. of Goa through the Chief Secretary and Anr.

Joao Mariano Fernandes Vs State of Goa and Anr.

Shri Kashiram K. Naik,Mormugao-Goa. Vs the Board of Trustees of the Port of Mormugao and an