TMI Blog2009 (5) TMI 954X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in terms of the Import and Export Policy. The third prayer made in the Writ Petition is for issue of Writ of Certiorari to quash Orders, mentioned in para 8 of the Writ Petition, rejecting the petitioner s claim for issue of replenishment licences, CCS and Additional CCS benefits. 2. Replenishment licences, CCS or Additional CCS are payable as per the Export Import Policy and other policies/guidelines prevalent from time to time. In para 8.1, the petitioner has given details of his claim in respect of 12 applications made by him for issue of replenishment licences. As per the petition itself, applications at serial numbers 2, 3, 4,5, 6,7 and 8 have been rejected with the appeal clause or the case closed for failure on the part of the pe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rd any letter or correspondence to show that he had protested against non-adjudication and failure to take up the First Appeal from 1989 onwards till 1996 when the Writ Petition was filed. 4. With regard to the application at serial no.9, the petitioner has admitted that his application was rejected and he was asked to file first appeal. The respondents in their counter affidavit have stated that the file of the First Appeal is not traceable but have pointed out that as per the petitioner, the First Appeal was rejected and thereupon the petitioner had filed Second Appeal in 1994. The petitioner has not filed any correspondence or details with regard to Second Appeal. 5. With regard to application at serial nos. 10 and 11, respondents ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ile a civil suit or other proceedings, if advised and establish their claim for damages. If required, the petitioner can move an application under Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963, for exclusion of period during which the writ petition has remained pending. 7. With regard to the claim for CCS, the petitioner in the Writ Petition states that three claims were rejected. Respondents, have stated that the CCS claims were rejected in view of para 309(3)(IV) of the Export Import Policy. The said Clause reads as under:- Para 309(3)(IV) the application received after a period of 24 months from the last month of the export period will be summarily rejected as time barred. 8. It is also pointed out that in respect of application no.1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
