GLEITIAGER I LTD Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners are engaged in industrial activities dealing with bi-metal products. They have obtained a licence in the year 1975 evidenced by Licence No. IL/290 (75) dated 6. 8. 1975 for the manufacture of bi-metal bearings, bushes and thrust washers. They were carrying on business in plot No. H-6 in MIDC Industrial Area, Chikalthana. They thought of opening up another activity-production of an allied product. The products were bi-metal bearings and bushes. They own Plot No. H-7 in the same industrial area. Needless to say that the plots must be contiguous to Plot No. H-6. In the new area, the petitioner set up production of bi-metal strips. They got a clarification evidenced by Exhibit-I dated 16. 8. 1988 that they do not require a separate licence/sia's registration for the manufacture of bi-metal strips for captiveuse in the light of the industrial licence already held by them.

(2.) THE petitioner made an application under Section 16 for infancy benefits for the establishment claiming that it is a new establishment. That has been considered by the Sub-Regional Officer of regional Provident Fund Office and rejected by communication Exhibit-H dated 27. 9. 1991. The application Exhibit-G emphasised only two aspects, viz. , that the factory was a new venture, that machines were newly purchased, and that the investments were raised afresh.

(3.) THE claim was considered, and as stated earlier, declined, under Exhibit-H. It was observed.