Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2018 (2) TMI 1792

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... direction issued by this Court, on 23-1-2018, this Court is not inclined to entertain this writ petition - petition dismissed. - W.P. No. 1398 of 2018 and W.M.P. Nos. 1767-1768 of 2018 - - - Dated:- 6-2-2018 - T.S. Sivagnanam, J. Shri Vijay Narayan, Senior Counsel for B. Sathishsundar, for the Petitioner. Shri G. Rajagopalan, Addl. Solicitor General assisted by Mrs. B. Rabu Manohar, Senior Standing Counsel, P.S. Raman, Senior Counsel for M/s. Preethi Mohan, for the Respondent. ORDER Heard Mr. Vijay Narayan, the Learned Senior Counsel for Mr. B. Sathishsundar, the Learned Counsel for the petitioner, Mr. G. Rajagopalan, the Learned Additional Solicitor General assisted by Mrs. B. Rabu Manohar, the Learned Senior Standin .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner would contend that an identical notification, which was issued in the year 2016, was challenged before the High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru in W.P. Nos. 65486 and 65487 of 2016, in which, an interim order has been granted on 22-12-2016 by directing the second respondent herein to defer the drawal of lots scheduled to be held on 27-12-2016 at 11 AM pursuant to the public notice dated 5-12-2016 or to any further date after 5-1-2017 and the cases were directed to be listed on 5-1-2017. Thereafter, the said interim order has been extended periodically and ultimately, the said writ petitions were heard finally and this Court is informed that orders have been reserved by the Learned Single .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... be done by drawal of lots. 7. Mr. P.S. Raman, Learned Senior Counsel appearing for Ms. Preeti Mohan, Learned Counsel for the intervener - M/s. Bora Agri Tech represented by its partner, shop Nos. 565 and 567, Duncan Road, Lane No. 5, Market Yard, Pune-411037, Maharashtra, would submit that parties, who seek to import poppy seeds, will submit their applications to the second respondent, which will be considered by the second respondent and only in the event that the applied quantity is in excess of the quantity allowable to be imported, the question of allocation by drawal of lots would arise. 8. In reply, the Learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner would submit that the Karnataka High Court granted an interim orde .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... spondent. It is made clear that submission of the application by the petitioner is without prejudice to their rights in this writ petition. The second respondent is also directed to make a note about the pendency of this writ petition before this Court at the instance of the petitioner, so that the other applicants are aware that such a case is pending before this Court. The second respondent, after receiving the applications, shall consider the same and before making any allocation, shall report before this Court as to what is the quantity, which has been applied for by the importers. On such information being placed before this Court by the second respondent, this Court will consider as to what further directions need be issued. This Cour .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... rim order at best, may be applicable to the Public notice, dated 5-12-2016, and it cannot be understood as a blanket ban on imports. The case was directed to be listed on 6-2-2018 (today) to consider, as to how best, the interest of the importers could be protected. 5. When the case is heard today, it is seen that the petitioner did not comply with the direction issued in paragraph No. 10 of the order, dated 23-1-2018, in this writ petition. The reason being that the petitioner does not have any contracts trade from China. 6. Thus, the petitioner has no locus standi to challenge the impugned notification. It is brought to my notice that, in the writ petition pending before the High Court of Bengaluru, the petitioner therein had moved .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates