Telangana High Court
M/S Sangam Health Care Products Ltd., vs Union Of India on 18 December, 2023
Author: Surepalli Nanda
Bench: Surepalli Nanda
HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA
WRIT PETITION No.32345 of 2011
ORDER:
The petitioner approached the Court seeking prayer as under:
"to issue a Writ of Mandamus or other appropriate order or direction in the nature of a Writ declaring proceedings bearing No.18/55/AM12/EPCGII/209, dated: 02-08- 2011 issued by the office of the second respondent as arbitrary, discriminatory and violative of Articles 14 and 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India and consequently, set aside the same and direct the respondent to extend time permitting the export obligation up to 2013 in the interest of justice."
2. This Court passed interim order dated 12.12.2011 observing as under:
"Rule Nisi. Call for records.
Notice returnable in four weeks.
Pending further orders, the respondents shall not take any coercive steps such as sale of any of the petitioner's property for recovery of customs due.
Learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents seeks time to get instructions and to file counter affidavit.
List the WPMP after four weeks"
3. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent Nos.2 and 3 placed reliance on the paragraph 2 SN,J WP_32345_2011 No.11 of the counter affidavit filed by the respondent Nos.2 and 3 and stated that no further orders are necessary. Paragraph No.11 of the counter affidavit filed by the respondent Nos.2 and 3 reads as under:
"In view of the foregoing submissions, it is submitted that the contention of the petitioner in para 17 that orders of the Hon'ble High Court quoted supra in WP No.17824/2011, dated 18.10.2011 would be of no consequence as the impugned orders dated 01.07.2011 and 02.08.2011 were passed prior to the judgment and order of this Hon'ble High Court as on 18.10.2011, is totally wrong. For, the nature and content of the orders of the Respondent are with regard to the representations dated 13.05.2011 and 09.06.2011 which were already considered and disposed of. Therefore, the respondents have already taken a correct decision which is in conformity with the orders of this Hon'ble High Court. Therefore, the present petition without any new set of facts and circumstances amounts to vexatious litigation and such an act on the part of the petitioner is nothing but abuse of the due process of law and wastage of the precious time of this Hon'ble High Court".
4. Taking into consideration the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and the submission of the learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of respondent Nos.2 and 3, the Writ Petition 3 SN,J WP_32345_2011 is dismissed as infructuous. Interim order granted by this Court on 12.012.2011 shall stand vacated. However, there shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in the Writ Petition shall also stand closed.
___________________________ MRS JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA 18th December, 2023 Plp/Lpd