TMI Blog2018 (3) TMI 722X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The petitioner must blame himself for having approached this Court belatedly and much after the cut off date. Secondly, the respondents are not obliged to preserve the records and endlessly. All that we have are three copies of applications made by the petitioner and we have referred to the details thereof There is thus merit in the contentions of the respondents that the scheme was to operate exclusively under the supervision of Reserve Bank of India. Secondly, the benefit of orders passed by this Court in the writ petitions which were filed in this Court but before the cut off date, can be of no assistance. The petitioner cannot be granted any relief - petition dismissed. - Writ Petition No. 2762 of 2001 - - - Dated:- 7-3-2018 - S.C. DHARMADHIKARI AND PRAKASH D. NAIK, JJ. Mr. Naresh Thakkar with Mr. Ajinkya Lokare and Ms. Ria Dalwari for petitioner. Mr. Pradeep S. Jetly with Mrs. S.V. Bharucha for Respondents. PC : 1. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner claims the following relief : (a) That this Hon'ble Court be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 6. The petitioner states that the petitioner had filed three applications pursuant to the REP Circular No.14 of 1993 dated 13th September 1993 in respect of the licences lying with the import-export authorities. It is the contention of petitioner that all these three applications were considered by respondents. Then reliance is placed on Circular No.4 of 1996-97, dated 1st July 1996 which states that earlier policy of payment of premium is further liberalized to the effect that cases which have been admitted for payment on or before 30th June 1994, but where payment could not be made, it was agreed by the Reserve Bank of India to issue cheques in respect thereof and the benefit would be granted. 7. Then the petitioner places reliance upon several writ petitions, which have been filed seeking benefit or payment of premium and orders made by this Court in the same. One such order is made in the case of M/s. Chowgule Co. Limited Vs. Assistant Director of Foreign Trade. Then reliance is placed on order which is passed in the case of M/s.Atul Gems and another Vs. Union of India and another in Writ Petition No.352 of 1998 decided on 31st March 1998. 8. The petitioner ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ereafter petitioner relies upon REP Circular No.4 of 1996-97, dated 1st July 1996, a copy of which is at page 43 of the paper book, to submit that there were various representations received by Directorate General of Foreign Trade from the export organizations as also individual exporters in relation to the matter of payment of premium; the issue of payment of premium was considered and a review was undertaken in consultation with Reserve Bank of India. Since the scheme was to operate on scrutiny and cooperation of Reserve Bank of India, it was stated in this circular as under : ... RBI has agreed to make payment in the following categories of cases : (i) Cases of revalidation where Court had given the orders before 01/03/1993 but the premium could not be paid before 30/06/1994. (ii) Cases of revalidation where Courts had given orders after 01/03/1993 but on or before 30/06/1996. These cases were not considered earlier because of REP Circular No.9/94 dated 17/05/1994. Now RBI has agreed to make payments in these cases also. (iii) Cases which have been filed before the Courts on or before 07/06/1996, as and when decided by the Courts. (iv) Cases admitt ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of petitioner is denied and it is prayed that the petition be dismissed. 12. Thus, the writ petition which was filed in this Court on 11th September 2001, the reply affidavit is filed in the month of October 2004. 13. Though Mr.Thakkar appearing for petitioner would submit that the petitioner's case must be considered in the light of policies which were then existing and the rights and benefits therein cannot be denied to the petitioners, we are unable to agree with him for more than one reason. 14. The petitioner may claim to have sought benefit of the policies and urged that only payment of premium was outstanding and that can be directed even now, we do not see how such a contention can be accepted and on the own pleadings of the petitioner. The petition is not filed as expeditiously as possible like others. The petition is filed in this Court on 11th September 2001. The first Circular at Exhibit-A is dated 5th May 1993. The said Circular itself says that those exporters, who have completed their exports and have realized the export proceeds before the introduction of the full convertibility but have not completed their imports under the duty free licences before 1s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... crips/REP licences. The stipulations contained therein makes it clear that general provisions will also be taken into account for granting benefit. After this circular was issued and with clarification that scheme for claiming premium shall commence from 15th March 1993, the last date for filing claim is 31st July 1993 and the payment shall be made before 31st August 1993 and no extension shall be granted. 16. What we find is that there is another circular viz Circular No.14 of 1993, copy of which is at Exhibit-B, dated 13th September 1993. The review of the earlier Circular No.11 of 1993, dated 5th May 1993 (Exhibit-A) resulted in issuance of this circular No.14 of 1993 dated 13th September 1993. That added certain stipulations and pertinently in paragraph 7 of this circular, it was stated that this scheme for claiming premium shall commence from 15th May 1993, the last date for filing the claim is 15th October 1993 and payments will be made by 31st December 1993. Clause7, therefore, sought to make a modification or change and the petitioner applied on 24th July 1993. That was for claiming premium for two licences; one was of 8th February 1993 and another is of prior date of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
