Disposed

Jindal Drugs Private Ltd. v. the Union of India through and Ors.

Bombay HC16 Nov 2021WP/518/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition sought directions to amend shipping bills to claim MEIS reward under the Foreign Trade Policy. The High Court, noting the lack of a final order on the petitioner's representation, directed the respondent officer to consider the representation and grant a hearing opportunity within three weeks before disposing of the petition.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondent number 3 to consider the representation and grant opportunity of hearing within three weeks.

Jindal Drugs Private Ltd. Vs the Union of India through… — Company and Corporate | Bombay HC (2021)

¶1

wp 518-21

¶2

Diksha Rane

¶3

Digitally signed by DIKSHA DIKSHADINESH DINESH RANE RANE Date:2021.11.17 10:59:50 +0530

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 518 OF 2021

¶5

Jindal Drugs Private Limited vs. The Union of India & ors.

¶6

..Petitioner

¶7

..Respondents

¶8

Mr. Prakash Shah i/b. PDS Legal for petitioner. Mr. J.B. Mishra a/w. Satyaprakash Sharma for respondent nos. 1 to 3.

¶9

C0RAM : DIPANKAR DATTA, CJ & M. S. KARNIK, J.

¶10

DATE: NOVEMBER 16, 2021

¶11

P.C. :

¶12

The prayer in this writ petition is for a direction to the respondents to:

¶13

“(i) amend the shipping bills to change the declaration of intent to claim MEIS reward in terms of Chapter 3 of Foreign Trade Policy 2015-20 from ‘N’ to ‘Y’;

¶14

(ii) upload the amendment shipping bills on the portal of the respondent nos. 4 and 5; and

¶15

(iii) accept and process the application for MEIS reward of the petitioner for 55 shipping bills filed for the period 2015-16 to 2017-18 physically.”

¶16

¶17

wp 518-21

¶18

We find that the writ petition having been placed before a coordinate Bench on February 11, 2021, the respondents were granted liberty to file reply affidavit by March 12, 2021. No reply affidavit has been filed.

¶19

Having regard to the fact that no order on the petitioner’s representation dated April, 27, 2018 [addressed to the Deputy Commissioner of Customs, the respondent no. 3] has been passed, as yet there is no refusal to grant

¶20

amendment as prayed for by the petitioner. In such circumstances, it would be just and appropriate if the respondent no. 3 is directed to consider the said representation in accordance with law and upon granting opportunity of hearing to the petitioner within three weeks from date. It is ordered accordingly.

¶21

In the event the petitioner’s prayer for amendment is granted, follow-up action shall be taken also in accordance with law; if, however, the prayer for amendment is disallowed, a reasoned order shall be passed and communicated to the petitioner immediately thereafter.

¶22

The writ petition is disposed of. No costs.

¶23

¶24

wp 518-21

¶25

Since we have disposed of this writ petition without examining the merits of the petitioner’s claim, we keep all contentions open for being urged before the respondent no.3.

¶26

(M.S. KARNIK, J.)

¶27

(CHIEF JUSTICE)

¶28

Jindal Drugs Private Ltd. v. the Union of India through and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jindal Drugs Private Ltd. v. the Union of India through and 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

Sejal Shakti Realtors LLP Vs High Court on Its Own Motion and Ors.

Sunil Ramchandra Shinde vs Union of India and 4 Ors.

Sunil Ramchandra Shinde vs Union of India and 4 Ors.

Karmaveer Shankarrao Kale Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd. Vs Aurangabad Distilleries Ltd. and Another

D3 Arcade Pvt. Ltd. and 2 Ors. Vs PNB Housing Finance Ltd.

Sunil B. Malshikare Vs the Superintendent of Police, Thane and Anr.