Bishan Saroop Ram Kishan Agro Pvt. ... vs Agricultural And Processed Food ...
2011 Latest Caselaw 3806 Del

$~72.
*     IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+      W.P.(C) 4786/2011 & CM No.11447/2011 (for condonation of delay).

       BISHAN SAROOP RAM KISHAN AGRO PVT. LTD. .... Petitioner
                    Through: Mr. Atul Nanda, Sr. Adv. with Mr.
                             Siddharth Singla, Ms. Rameeza
                             Hakeem, Mr. Rajat Brar & Mr. Anvit
                             Jain, Adv.

                                  versus

       AGRICULTURAL AND PROCESSED FOOD PRODUCTS
       EXPORT DEV. AUTHORITY AND ORS.        ..... Respondents
                    Through: Mr. Sachin Datta with Mr.
                             Abhimanyu Kumar, Adv. for R-1
                             along with Mr. Naveen Sharma,
                             (DM), APEDA.
       CORAM:
       HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW

                                ORDER

% 08.08.2011

1. The counter affidavit filed by the respondent no.1 Agricultural and

Processed Food Products Export Development Authority (APEDA) states

that the petitioner has been de-registered for an attempt to export Non-

Basmati Rice and consignment in which regard was confiscated by the

Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI), Lucknow.

2. The respondent no.1 APEDA to file a better affidavit along with all

the documents on the basis whereof satisfaction was reached that the

petitioner was guilty of the export for which it has been de-registered. The

same be filed within one week.

3. The counsel for the respondent no.1 states that DRI would be a

necessary and property party. He seeks impleadment of DRI which would be

in possession of the entire record in this regard.

4. The senior counsel for the petitioner opposes the impleadment of DRI

stating that the respondent no.1 APEDA could not have acted at the behest

of the DRI.

5. Since the allegations against the petitioner are grave and the

investigating agency is DRI which would be in the possession of entire

record, this Court feels that the petitioner should not derive any benefit of

technicalities and it is expedient that all the records are placed before this

Court for this Court to find out whether there is any merit in the conclusion

on the basis whereof the petitioner has been de-registered.

6. Accordingly, DRI is impleaded as the respondent no.3. The petitioner

to serve the nominated counsel for DRI. The counsel for the respondent no.1

APEDA to also inform the nominated counsel for DRI and the entire record

of DRI be placed before this Court on the next date of hearing.

7. At this stage, the senior counsel for the petitioner on instructions

states that without conferring any right on the petitioner to export, the matter

may be remanded to the respondent no.1 APEDA for decision afresh after

furnishing to the petitioner the entire record from DRI on the basis whereof

the decision has been taken and giving an opportunity to the petitioner to

respond thereto.

8. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed with the following

directions:-

a) The respondent no.1 APEDA to within two weeks hereof furnish

to the petitioner the entire material in its power and possession for

reaching the decision impugned in this petition;

b) It is clarified that the respondent no.1 APEDA shall be entitled to

call for further material from DRI and to furnish the same to the

petitioner;

c) The petitioner to within one week thereafter file its response

thereto;

d) The petitioner to appear before the respondent no.1 APEDA for

hearing on 5th September, 2011 at 1100 hours and on such

subsequent dates as may be necessary;

e) The respondent no.1 APEDA to pass a fresh reasoned order

dealing with the contentions of the petitioner on or before 20 th

September, 2011 and to communicate the same to the petitioner;

f) If the petitioner remains aggrieved, the petitioner shall have

remedies in law;

g) Till the decision as aforesaid, the bar on the petitioner from

exporting to continue.

No order as to costs.

Dasti.

RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW,J AUGUST 08, 2011 pp..