Margadarsi Marketing Private ... vs Union Of India (Uoi) And Ors.
2002 Latest Caselaw 1447 Del

JUDGMENT

Manmohan Sarin, J.

Rule.

1. With the consent of the parties, writ petition is taken up for disposal.

The petitioner has filed the present writ petition seeking a writ of certiorari for quashing the impugned order dated 12.10.2001, bearing No. F.14-4/96-Ant (Annexure P.1) as being null and void and in violation of principles of natural justice. It is also assailed as being in contravention of Article 14, 19(1)g and 300A of the Constitution of India. Petitioner had also sought a declaration that Section 24 of the Antiquities and Art Treasures Act, 1972 is arbitrary, discriminatory, null and void being in contravention of Article 14 & 19(1)g of the Constitution of India.

Learned counsel for the petitioner does not press in this writ petition the relief in respect of Section 24 being null and void.

2. Mr. Prag Tripathi, senior counsel for the petitioner, assailed the impugned order appearing at page 33 of the paper book, holding the Icons/statutes in question to be antiques as one devoid of any reasons. Petitioner's grievance was also of not having been given any opportunity of hearing. Counsel had urged that the respondents did not take into account that the purchase was made from Swamimalai Icon Manufacturers Cooperative Cottage Industrial Society Ltd. The bills of the same have been produced on record. S. Rajan alias S. Raj Gopal, who had made 3 of the 6 Icons has given an affidavit to the effect that the same have been made by him and he could produce similar ones.

3. During the course of arguments learned senior counsel submitted that the petitioner was willing to arrange a live demonstration by the master craftsman to manufacture identical statutes having the same features and the antique look. He submitted that the demonstration could be witnessed by members of the respondent committee or any of its nominees. On this submission Mr. U. Hazarika, Central Standing Counsel was asked to obtain instructions. Today Mr. U. Hazarika states that instructions have been obtained and the respondents are amenable to give a hearing and the petitioner could also arrange for the live demonstration. The impugned order in these circumstances is set aside. The respondents within 2 weeks from today shall constitute an experts committee, before whom the petitioner shall demonstrate the manufacture of the Icons and the statutes. Respondents shall within 4 weeks notify the petitioner of the venue and the composition of the Committee and fix the hearing before the Committee. The entire expenses including transportation to and fro to the venue, for the members, as also other incidental expenses including boarding and lodging shall be borne by the petitioner. The petitioner would give its suggestions regarding modalities of demonstration of the entire manufacturing process and the various stages involved. It would be entirely for the expert committee to decide whether it wishes to witness part of manufacturing process or the entire manufacturing process. Based on the decision of the committee, Petitioner shall make suitable arrangements and bear all the expenses for the demonstration.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that demonstration shall be arranged at the workshop at Thanjavur. Petitioner shall also be given an opportunity to submit additional representation, if it so desires. Competent authority upon receipt of the report of the committee shall take a decision on the question whether the Icons/statutes ought to be declared as antiques or not and pass a reasoned order within 6 months from today. Counsel for the petitioner assures the court that petitioner will fully cooperate with the respondent. In case petitioner fails to cooperate or defaults in complying with any of the directions, respondent authority shall be free to proceed with the matter on the basis of such evidence and records as are available with and pass an order.

Writ petition is disposed of in the above terms.