KESHAV MATHUR Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) D. S. Sinha, J. Heard Sri Vivek Kumar Birla, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner, Sri Yashwant Verma, learned Counsel representing the respon dent Nos. 4 and 5 and Sri S. G. Husnain, learned Addl. Chief Standing Counsel representing the respondent Nos. 6 and 7. No Counsel of Central Government rep resenting the respondent Nos. 1,2 and 3, is present. Facts of the case, briefly stated, are these:

(2.) BY means of his application dated 2nd May, 1990, the petitioner applied to the Central Government for grant of licence under Section 11 of the Industries (Development and Regulation) Act, 1951, here in after called the "act", for estab lishing a new Industrial Undertaking of Sugar Factory at Nawabganj in the district of Bareilly. It appears that the application was processed and certain additional in formation were called for from the petitioner which was supplied by him on 7th May, 1993.

(3.) FROM Annexure '7' appended to the counter-affidavit filed on behalf of the respondent Nos. 4 and 5 and Annexure ' 1 to the counter-affidavit filed on behalf of the respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 3, it transpires that the application of the petitioner dated 2nd May, 1990 praying for grant of licence under Section 11 of the Act had already been rejected by a reasoned order dated 24th May, 1994. In deed, photo and typed copy have been filed. Annexure '7' to the counter-affidavit of the respondent Nos. 4 and 5 is the photo copy of the order dated 24th May, 1994 and Annexure T to the counter-affidavit of respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 3 is a typed copy of the order dated 24th May, 1994. Copies of the counter- affidavits of the respondent Nos. 4 and 5 and of the respon dent Nos. 1, 2 and 3 were served on the Counsel of the petitioner on 16th January, 1995 and 20th February, 1995, as is evident from the endorsement made by the Coun sel on the counter-affidavits.