TMI Blog2023 (6) TMI 1095X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n/entity falls within the category of aggrieved person , who has suffered legal injury and is entitled to challenge the effect/action of the order in the court of law. It was further observed that the court can enforce the performance of a statutory duty by a public body, using its writ jurisdiction at the behest of a person, provided that such person satisfies the court that he has a legal right to insist on such performance. In view of observations of the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Ayaaubkhan Noorkhan Pathan, it is opined that by any stretch of imagination the applicant cannot be treated to be a person aggrieved, who has suffered a legal injury by the direction of learned Single Bench to disclose the numerical values from the complaint filed by the applicant to the competent authority - accepting the instant application seeking leave to file appeal would tantamount to granting more leverage to the applicant than what was allowed in the original writ proceedings which is absolutely unwarranted. The instant application seeking leave to file appeal is devoid of merit and, hence the same is dismissed. - I.A.(Civil)/2414/2022, WA/11/2020, WA/265/2022 - - - Dated:- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e process for imposition of Anti-Dumping Duty (ADD) on the respondent on import of Melamine was initiated on the complaint of the applicant. It was thus contended that the applicant is indisputably a person aggrieved in the matter. Mr. Sharma further submitted that the direction given by the learned Single Judge in paragraph 169 of the impugned judgment (supra) to inform the interested party, i.e. the writ petitioner of the essential facts under consideration, which formed the basis of the decision to impose ADD, would directly infringe upon the confidentiality clause under Rule 7 of the Customs Tariff (Identification, Assessment and Collection of Anti-Dumping Duty on Dumped Articles and for Determination of Injury) Rules, 1995 (for short 1955 Rules ). He thus urged that the denial of right to file an appeal against the impugned judgment would imply that the confidentiality of the information supplied by the applicant to the designated authority would be impinged at the same time, denying the right to seek legal remedy to the applicant herein. Mr. Sarmah submitted that as per the language of Rule 7, in case the informer, which in the present case is the applicant herein, objects t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ly affecting the writ petitioner inasmuch as the Anti Dumping Duty (ADD) was quantified on the basis of these very values. As per Dr. Saraf, veil of confidentiality on these informations could not have been claimed because the same formed the foundation of the order imposing ADD. The disclosure thereof is essential so that the interested/affected party, i.e. the writ petitioner, can put forth submissions for seeking final findings of the designated authority. He further urged that the learned Single Judge considered the purport of confidentiality, i.e. Rule 7(1) vis- -vis the provisions contained in Rule 16 of the Rule of 1955 and thereafter came to a just and logical conclusion that requirement of Rule 16 is not subject to the confidentiality clause of Rule 7. Dr. Saraf submitted that the view taken by the learned Single Judge expressing reservation about maintaining confidentiality even on the parameters effecting determination of ADD is absolutely justified and, hence, the applicant has no reason to be aggrieved of the said disclosure as it would not cause any legal injury to the applicant. He further urged that a notification dated 18.02.2019 has been issued by the Assistant Di ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... we may note that the applicant may have provided the information which led to the initiation of the enquiry for determination of the ADD, but merely the fact that the information provided by the applicant led to initiation of the proceeding for imposition of ADD by itself would not imply that the applicant is a person aggrieved in this case. Mr. Sarmah placed reliance on the judgment rendered in the case of Jasbhai Motibhai Desai vs. Roshan Kumar, Haji Bashir Ahmed and Others, reported in (1976) 1 SCC 671 in support of the argument that the applicant is a person aggrieved in this case. However, we feel that in light of the observations made by the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Ayaaubkhan Noorkhan Pathan vs. State of Maharashtra Ors. , reported in (2013) 4 SCC 465 , which was also referred to by Mr. Sarmah, the applicant cannot be considered to be a person aggrieved in the legal parlance. The relevant paragraphs of the judgment of the Hon ble Supreme Court in Ayaaubkhan Noorkhan Pathan (supra) are reproduced herein below: 9. It is a settled legal proposition that a stranger cannot be permitted to meddle in any proceeding, unless he satisfies the Authority/C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aken an affirmative view that a stranger cannot be permitted to meddle in any judicial proceedings unless the court is satisfied that such person/entity falls within the category of aggrieved person , who has suffered legal injury and is entitled to challenge the effect/action of the order in the court of law. It was further observed that the court can enforce the performance of a statutory duty by a public body, using its writ jurisdiction at the behest of a person, provided that such person satisfies the court that he has a legal right to insist on such performance. The existence of such right is a condition precedent for invoking the writ jurisdiction of the courts. Legal right means an entitlement arising out of legal rules. Thus, it may be defined as an advantage or a benefit conferred upon a person by the rule of law. The expression person aggrieved does not include a person who suffers from a psychological or an imaginary injury. 7. Viewed in light of the aforesaid observations of the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Ayaaubkhan Noorkhan Pathan (supra), we are of the firm opinion that by any stretch of imagination the applicant cannot be treated to be a person agg ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
