SID INDUSTRIES P LTD Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE case of the petitioner is that respondents have imposed a penalty of Rs.10,54,200/- for non-performance of the export obligation. Petitioner had sought and obtained quota on the basis of the first-cum-first-serve (FCFS).

(2.) PETITIONER was required to export 20,000 kgs of garment in GR-II Type category. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that pursuant to the direction given by the Supreme Court, the SDM passed the Order sealing the factory of its suppliers on 24.11.2000. This prevented the petitioner from fulfilling the export obligation which was required to be done by December 2000. This is sought to be treated as 'force majeure'. It is urged that penalty ought not to have been imposed. The Textile Committee as also the Appellate Committee have taken the view that it was for the petitioner to make alternate arrangements. The assertion sealing of supplier's factory occurred suddenly on 26.11.2000 is not correct. In fact directions had been given by the Supreme Court even earlier in 1999 for closure of non-conforming units. It was for the petitioner to have made alternate arrangements. The last Order of the Supreme Court, which has been referred to by the petitioner may be the culmination of the earlier directions given. However, this was a matter in public domain. PETITIONER would have been aware of the prevailing situation. I find that the view taken by the Appellate Committee is a plausible and correct view. PETITIONER took a business risk and the circumstances which are set out cannot be said to be falling within 'force majeure'. No ground for interference in the exercise of writ jurisdiction is made out. Accordingly, writ petition is dismissed.