TATA TELESERVICES (MAHARASHTRA) LTD. Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Issue notice, returnable on 24th April, 2015 Mr. Jetly waives service of notice for Respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 3. Mrs. Masurkar waives service of notice for Respondent Nos. 4 and 5. Humdast granted for Respondent No. 6. Heard Mr. Madon, learned senior counsel appearing for the Petitioners, Mr. Jetly for Respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 3 and Mrs. Masurkar for Respondent Nos. 4 and 5 on the question of grant of interim relief.

(2.) There are series of litigations between the parties on earlier occasion. The petitioners had imported certain material. Under the policy framed by the Union of India, the petitioners were entitled to certain benefits if the company or the sister concern makes exports in the ratio of eight times of the duty in a period of ten years. Accordingly, the petitioners had claimed the benefit of the exports made by Tata Consultancy Services. The same was denied to the petitioners. As such, the petitioners had approached this Court vide Writ Petition No. 2374 of 2011 as well as Writ Petition No. 2003 of 2011. This Court found that the order passed by respondent No. 2 was not a speaking order and as such, remanded the matter for fresh consideration. Even after remand respondent No. 2 confirmed its earlier order. As such, the petitioners were required to approach this Court vide Writ Petition Nos. 233 of 2013 and 237 of 2013. This Court by the judgment and order dated 20th December, 2014 held that the petitioners were entitled to the benefit of exports made by its sister concern. It held that in view of the clarification dated 11th November, 2008 by the Directorate General of Foreign Trade, the petitioners would fall even in the parameters/criteria involved in para 9.28 of the policy. Though the petitioners in pursuance to the order dated 20th December, 2014 have approached respondent No. 4 for grant of Export Obligation Discharge Certificate (EODC), the same has not yet been issued by respondent No. 4 to the petitioners.

(3.) In the meantime, respondent Nos. 1 to 3 have addressed a communication to Respondent No. 6 for encashment of one of the bank guarantees submitted by the petitioners for an amount of Rs. 1 crore.