DUKES PHARMA Vs. GOVERNMENT OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Order of the Court is as follows :- In all these cases, though different Notifications are mentioned in the affidavits filed in support of these petitions, the sole question of law advanced before me being common, these writ petitions are disposed of by this common Order.

(2.) I shall set out at the appropriate place the common question of law that arises for consideration, after narrating the facts that are necessary for appreciating and understanding the issue before us.

(3.) KANAKARAJ, ]. , while considering the constitutional validity of a similar proviso to Clause 1 in Notification No. 80/80 as amended on 25-3-1981, has discussed similar arguments before him and negatived the same, in W. P. No. 1940 of 1981, etc. batch [smt. S. Pannadeviv. The Government of Indiarepresented by Secretary to Government, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, New Delhi - Order dated 6-4-1990. The learned Judge discussed the point as follows :-" The next argument of Mr. Elamurugan is that if the impugned notification is implemented, it would result in infringement of the constitutional guarantee provided under Article 14 of the Constitution of india. While illustrating this point, it is averred that the first loan licensee who clears his goods in advance of others would derive benefit of the exemption whereas the other loan licensees are denied the benefit. The method of assessment after the introduction of the impugned notification has been explained by Mr. P. Narasimhan, learned Senior Central Government Standing counsel. According to him, if at the end of a financial year the aggregate value of the goods cleared from the factory is more than the prescribed limit, then none of the loan licensees will be entitled to exemption[1]. Thus, the basis of the argument of the counsel for the petitioners is taken away and the complaint of violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of India falls to the ground. " (Underlining mine) This Order of KANAKARAJ was taken on appeal in Writ appeal Nos. 233 to 236 of 1991 (C. J. Hewlett &sons India (P)Ltd. v. Government of Indiarepresented by Secretary to Government, Ministry of finance, Department of Revenue, New Delhi - Judgment dated 13-3-1991), and the first Bench, accepting the Order of KANAKARAJ, ]. , dismissed the Appeals.