TMI Blog1989 (9) TMI 343X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ber 11, 1987, the company informed the District Industries Centre, Khargone, that production had already started in the factory and the other formalities having been completed, permanent registration as an SSI unit be granted. The letter is annexure-E. The request was turned down by the District Industries Centre on the ground that the manufacture of the item is banned by the Government of India and, therefore, it was not possible to grant permanent registration to the petitioners unit and it was also informed that the petitioner's registration is also cancelled. The letter of the District Industries Centre dated October 20, 1987, is annexure-F. According to the petitioner company, they were shocked to receive this letter because, acting on the provisional registration, they completed all the formalities and had established the unit by investing lakhs of rupees. At no time was the petitioner company ever intimated that the Government of India or the State Government had banned the production of Indian made foreign liquor. Cancellation of the provisional registration was also never communicated to the petitioner before that date. After receiving the aforesaid letter, the company pro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The grievance of the petitioner is that since only less than 49 workers are employed in the unit, it was not necessary to obtain the licence of the Government of India under the Central Act. The condition imposed by the respondent is, therefore, illegal and without authority of law. The refusal of the respondent to grant permanent registration as a small scale industrial unit to the company is causing irreparable loss to the petitioner-company. For want of registration, the application for grant of a no-objection certificate under the Pollution Control Act is "also not being decided Various other Departments of the Government are also not extending the facility for want of permanent registration. The State Government has framed no rules or guidelines for grant of registration as a small scale industrial unit and no guidelines or rules have been published for the information of the public. However, it is an established practice of the Government that, when a provisional registration is granted to the proposed unit and when the unit goes into production, the provisional registration is converted into a permanent registration automatically. Thus, the entire enquiry about the eligibi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the State refusing the grant of permanent registration to the petitioner-company with a direction to the respondents to grant permanent registration as a small scale industrial unit to the petitioner's unit. Respondents Nos. 1 to 3 have filed a joint return opposing the petition of the petitioner. It has been pleaded that although it is admitted that the Government of Madhya Pradesh, in the Separate Revenue Department, had issued a letter of intent for grant of licence in Form D-2, under the Madhya Pradesh Excise Act and the rules made thereunder for establishing a plant for manufacture and bottling of Indian made foreign liquor in Khargone District, a specific condition was inserted in the letter of intent for issuance of licence as under : "It will be your sole responsibility to obtain any other licences required for your project under the Act, Rules, Regulations and Orders of the Government of Madhya Pradesh as well as of the Government of India." While granting the licence, a specific condition was also inserted that, before commencement of the production, the no objection certificate from the Madhya Pradesh Pollution Control Board will have to be obtained. The petiti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... out the petitioner obtaining a licence from the Ministry of Industrial Development, Government of India. The petitioner has misled the District Industries Centre, Khargone, by stating that the Madhya Pradesh Government issued a licence in favour of the petitioner for manufacture of Indian made foreign liquor. In fact the Government of Madhya Pradesh, in the Separate Revenue Department, has very clearly stipulated that the petitioner shall be responsible for obtaining all necessary licences from all other Departments and the Government of India. By way of rejoinder, the petitioner has averred that the petitioner had a composite unit in which a distillery and bottling plant were to be established So far as the distillery is concerned, it falls under the fermentation industry and, therefore, clearance from the Pollution Control Authority may be required. So far as bottling is concerned, it does not come under the purview of the fermentation industry and therefore, even under the notification relied upon by the respondents, it cannot be said to be an industry falling in the schedule of highly polluting industries referred to by the respondents. The petitioner has obtained D-2 licence ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to the petition dated July 15, 1988, it has been stated that it was issued to the petitioner in response to the letter of the petitioner dated May 20, 1988, and that letter cannot be made the basis. To make the position further clear, the petitioner has filed an affidavit stating therein that, by inadvertence, the strength of workers has been show a as 100, but immediately the mistake was corrected by the petitioner. It has also been stated that respondents Nos. 4 and 5 had advised the petitioner to route their application through the EPCO Cell of the Director of Industries. Madhya Pradesh. Therefore, the petitioner applied through the EPCO Cell of the Director of Industries, but the application has been withheld by the Director of Industries on the ground that the Industry proposed to be set up by the petitioner is banned by the Government of India, vide its press note. The petitioner has also referred to the Circular of the Madhya Pradesh Government, dated May 20, 1987, in which it has been clearly stated that pollution clearance is not necessary for a bottling industry. The circular is also filed along with the reply. In view of the aforesaid pleadings of the parties, it is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... heduled industries, a permanent licence could not have been granted to these units by the State of Madhya Pradesh without, a licence under section 11 of the Central Act having been granted to them by the Government of India. The Supreme Court considered the arguments advanced by the appellants in that case and has in para 30 of the judgment held as under (p. 278) : "The learned counsel appearing on behalf of Doongaji and Co., also raised another contention based on the provisions of the Industries (Development and Regulation) Act, 1951. The argument of learned counsel was that respondents Nos. 5-11 were not entitled to set up new distilleries at new sites without obtaining a licence from the Central Government under section 11 of this Act and since there was nothing to show that they had obtained such licences before setting up the new distilleries, their action in setting up the new distilleries was illegal and could not give rise to any rights in their favour. But this contention is also unsustainable. In the first place, no such contention was raised in the writ petitions and neither the State Government nor respondents Nos. 5 to 11 had any opportunity of answering such conten ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... India, the industry being a scheduled industry, a licence from the Government of India is necessary. In our opinion, this plea of the respondents cannot be allowed to stand in view of the aforesaid decision of the Supreme Court .in State of M.P. v. Nandlal Jaiswal AIR 1987 SC 251, wherein it has been held that a licence from the Government of India under the Central Act of 1951, is not necessary for the distilling industry, provided the number of workers in the industry is less than fifty. In the light of the aforesaid pleadings, it is not in dispute that the application for grant of a no objection certificate from the Pollution Control Board is pending with the Government in the office of the Director of Industries, EPCO Cell, and that application has been filed on the advice of respondents Nos. 4 and 5 by the petitioner. It appears that this application is not being forwarded by the Director of Industries to the Pollution Control Board in view of the fact that the petitioner has not obtained a licence from the Government of India under the Central Act of 1951 and, for the same reasons, the permanent registration is also not being granted to the petitioner. In view of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
