Dismissed

M/S. Unity Rapier Weaves through Mr. Kirankumar N. Thummar v. Union of India

Gujarat HC22 Nov 2021CA/3042/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Gujarat High Court condo-ed a 117-day delay in filing a Letters Patent Appeal against an order denying a Unique Identification Number (UID) for a textile scheme. The appeal was subsequently dismissed as the court found no merit, holding funds were exhausted and the application was past the cutoff date.

What did the court decide?

Condonance of 117 days delay granted; Letters Patent Appeal dismissed.

M/S. Unity Rapier Weaves through Mr. Kirankumar N… — Company and Corporate | Gujarat HC (2021)

¶1

C/CA/3042/2020 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 22/11/2021

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

¶3

R/CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 3042 of 2020

¶4

¶5

R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 942 of 2021

¶6

With

¶7

R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 942 of 2021

¶8

¶9

SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 14648 of 2018

¶10

FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:

¶11

HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR

¶12

and

¶13

HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MAUNA M. BHATT

¶14

==========================================================

¶15

1	Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?	NO
2	To be referred to the Reporter or not ?	NO
3	Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ?	NO
4	Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution of India or any order made thereunder ?	NO

¶16

==========================================================

¶17

M/S. UNITY RAPIER WEAVES THROUGH MR. KIRANKUMAR N.

THUMMAR

Versus

UNION OF INDIA

==========================================================

¶22

Appearance:

¶23

MR DHAVAL V SHAH(6634) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 MR. ZALAK B PIPALIA(6161) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 MR DEVANG VYAS(2794) for the Respondent(s) No. 1 UNSERVED WANT OF TIM(31) for the Respondent(s) No. 2

¶24

==========================================================

¶25

Page 1 of 6

¶26

C/CA/3042/2020 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 22/11/2021

¶27

CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR

¶28

and

¶29

HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MAUNA M. BHATT

¶30

Date : 22/11/2021

¶31

CAV JUDGMENT

¶32

(PER : HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MAUNA M. BHATT)

¶33

Order in Civil Application

¶34

The above Civil Application is filed seeking condonation of delay of 117 days in preferring the Letters Patent Appeal .

¶35

Considering the grounds stated in the application we are satisfied that sufficient cause has been shown and therefore, the delay of 117 days in filing the Letters Patent Appeal is condoned in the interest of justice.

¶36

Registry to give regular number to the Letters Patent Appeal.

¶37

Order in Letters Patent Appeal

¶38

Considering the issues involved in the Letters Patent Appeal, with the consent of the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties, this Appeal is admitted and taken up for final hearing.

¶39

The present Letters Patent Appeal is filed challenging the order of learned Single Judge dated 21.10.2019 passed in Special Civil Application No.14648 of 2018. The Appellant- Original Petitioner being aggrieved by inaction on the part of Respondent No.2 in not issuing the

¶40

Page 2 of 6

¶41

C/CA/3042/2020 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 22/11/2021

¶42

Unique Identification Number (UID number) for participation to get benefit of the scheme floated for Textile Industry had filed Special Civil Application No.14648 of 2018.

¶43

The facts necessary for adjudication in the present Appeal are as under:

¶44

3.1. The Appellant is a partnership firm engaged in the business of textile. The Ministry of Textiles, Government of India, initially in the year 1999 introduced a scheme called “Technology Up-gradation Fund Scheme” (TUF). The TUFS was introduced to catalyze investments in all the sub-sectors of textiles and jute industry by 5% interest reimbursement. The said scheme was extended from time to time with modifications. TUFS was then further extended/rolled over utpo 31.3.2013. In the resolution dated 4.10.2013, the Ministry of Textiles noted that the modified TUFS was discontinued and Restructured TUFS Scheme (RTUF) was launched which was operative upto 31.3.2012. Under the said resolution, it was resolved to further continue the said scheme in a revised restructured form and the scheme accordingly came to be known as Revised Restructured Technology Up-gradation Fund Scheme (RR-TUFS). The financial and operational parameters of the RR-TUFS in respect of loans sanctioned under the Scheme have been enumerated under paragraph 6 of the said Resolution.

¶45

3.2. The RR-TUFS was thereafter replaced by Amended Technology Up-gradation Fund Scheme (A-TUFS) under Circular No.4 dated 22.5.2017. The Ministry of Textile noted that the A-TUFS was operative for the period from 13.1.2016 to 31.3.2022. The circular further notes that the UID under RR-TUFS were issued strictly on First In First Out

¶46

Page 3 of 6

¶47

C/CA/3042/2020 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 22/11/2021

¶48

(FIFO) basis and the later applications were pending. A window was made available for a period of one month in the i-TUFS Software to the respective Applicant units under RR-TUFS for exercising an option. In the event, the said option was not exercised within the prescribed time limit of one month from the date of issuance of the said Circular dated 22.5.2017, it was to be presumed that Applicant unit was not interested to exercise the option and such applications was to be kept as wait listed under RR-TUFS and their case would be subject to availability of funds. Under Circular No.3 dated 3.5.2018, the aforesaid fact was reiterated.

¶49

3.3. The Appellant made a request to the Respondents for issuance of Unique Identification Number (UID) seeking participation to get the benefits under RR-TUFS upon non-grant of such request, Special Civil Application NO.14648 of 2018 came to be filed. The said Petition came to be rejected under oral order dated 21.10.2019 by the learned Single Judge. The present Appeal has been preferred challenging the said order.

¶50

Heard Mr. Zalak Pipalia, learned advocate for the Appellant and Mr. Devang Vyas, learned Assistant Solicitor General for Respondent.

¶51

The Appellant has contended that once the Appellant had filed the application through online portal under RR-TUFS, it was incumbent upon the Respondent to generate UID. It is further contended by the Appellant that it can avail the benefit under the scheme only upon issuance of UID. The Appellant further submitted that it had made substantial investment and non-grant of such benefits due to non-issuance of UID will cause serious hardship.

¶52

On the other hand, the Respondent has contended that the

¶53

Page 4 of 6

¶54

C/CA/3042/2020 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 22/11/2021

¶55

Appellant had preferred an application beyond the prescribed time limit i.e. 12.1.2016 and, therefore, Appellant was not eligible for the benefits under the scheme. In support of his contention, Respondent has placed reliance on paragraphs 4.6. and 4.12 of the Affidavit filed in Special Civil Application.

¶56

Having heard both the sides, it transpires that in the circulars dated 22.5.2017 and 3.5.2018, it has been recorded that UID Number under RR-TUFS was issued to the Applicant units who had submitted their applications to the Textile Commissioner upto 12.1.2016 midnight on FIFO basis. Under the said circular, one time window was made available for one month in the i-TUFS to the respective units under RRTUFS for exercising the option. If the said option was not exercised within the prescribed time limit of one month, it was to be presumed that applicant units are not interested in exercising the option and such applications was to be kept as wait listed under RR-TUFS and their cases would be subject to availability of funds.

¶57

On closer perusal of Circular No.4, it is borne out that funds allocated by Government of India and issuance of UID have a direct correlation with one other. The moment the funds gets exhausted it is not possible for the Government of India to issue UID. In the present case, the funds under RR-TUFS was already exhausted and as such it was not possible to generate UID of the Applicant unit and applicant had not submitted their application to the Textile Commissioner within the time prescribed i.e. upto 12.1.2016. The only option thereafter left for the applicant for generating UID was to avail benefit under A-TUFS which admittedly has not been exercised by the Appellant.

¶58

Page 5 of 6

¶59

C/CA/3042/2020 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 22/11/2021

¶60

The Appellant has admittedly not exercised the said option and therefore, would continue to retain the existing status under RR-TUFS. In such circumstances therefore, UID Number was not allotted to the Appellant by the Respondent.

¶61

The learned Single Judge has analyzed the said Circular No.4 in its true intent and perspective. Further, there being no challenge to the policy circulars, interference to the order of learned Single Judge is not called for.

¶62

In light of above, we do not find any error in the impugned order passed by the learned Single Judge and we find no merit in this Appeal and same stands dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.

(ARAVIND KUMAR,CJ)

(MAUNA M. BHATT,J)

NAIR SMITA V.

Page 6 of 6

M/S. Unity Rapier Weaves through Mr. Kirankumar N. Thummar v. Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S. Unity Rapier Weaves through Mr. Kirankumar N. Thummar v. Union of India

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

Manishaben Dashratlal Patel D/O Natwarlal Keshavlal Patel Vs State of Gujarat

Chimanlal Jerambhai Bhagat (Deceased) Vs Competent Authority Under Land Acquisition Act and Deputy Collector

Ajitbhai Ganpatbhai Parmar Vs State of Gujarat

Canara Bank Vs Nakoda Limited

Parishram Construction Vs Barwala Nagar Palika

Navin @ Navneetbhai Vanmalidas Patel Vs Bachchanidhi Pani (Ias), Municipal Commissioner