IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE P.V.SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO : 24208 of 2008 Between: Jeevaka Industries Ltd., A Co. incorporated under Companies Act, 1956 Having its regd office at: 15-2-358, 1st Floor, Mukhtyargunj, Hyderabad - 12. Rep by its Director, Mr.Sudhir Agarwal, S/o. Sri Premchand, Aged about 35 years, R/o. Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise, Hyderabad B Division, 1st Floor, Saileela Plaza, KPHB Colony, Hyderabad - 72. 2 Assistant Commissioner of Customs, Custom House, Port Area, Visakhapatnam. 3 State Bank of Hyderabad, Mahaboob Ganj Branch, Hyderabad - 12. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue a writ, direction or order especially in the nature of the writ of mandamus directing Respondent No.1 to issue an "end use certificate" in terms of Notification No.21/2002 dated 1-3-2002 in respect of the 3000 MT of Shredded scrap imported by the Petitioner vide Bill of entry No.Dt./cc/Typ:802562/12/08/2005/N/H pursuant to the request made by the Petitioner. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.S.RAVI Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.A.RAJASHEKAR REDDY (ASST SOLICITOR GEN) The court made the following: THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.V.SANJAY KUMAR Writ Petition No.24208 of 2008 ORDER: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice Goda Raghuram) Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Solicitor General for India for respondents 1 and 2. Writ petition is filed seeking the relief of a direction to the first respondent to issue an ‘end use certificate’ in terms of the Notification No.21/2002, dated 01.03.2002, in respect of 3000 metric tonnes of shredded scrap imported by the petitioner, vide Bill of entry No.Dt./cc/Typ:802562/12/08/2005/N/H. On 20.02.2006, the petitioner applied to the first respondent for issuance of an ‘end use certificate’ in terms of the exemption notification, dated 01.03.2002 (referred to earlier), in respect of 3000 metric tonnes of shredded scrap imported by the petitioner from the United States, vide a bill of entry No. Dt./cc/Typ:802562/12/08/2005/N/H. There was a meandering correspondence between the petitioner and the respondents with regard to the particulars that are required to be furnished by the petitioner for enabling the first respondent to issue an ‘end use certificate’. On 08.03.2006, the petitioner addressed the first respondent submitting certain documents (seven in number) in support of its application for issuance of an ‘end use certificate’. On 26.05.2006, the first respondent sought further particulars and on 16.06.2006, the petitioner submitted the particulars sought by the first respondent by letter, dated 26.05.2006, and reiterated the request for issuance of an ‘end use certificate’. On 16.06.2006, the petitioner addressed the first respondent for issuance of an ‘end use certificate’ stating therein that copies of way bills, weighment document etc., along with cheque payments in support of the claim for freight payment, have been furnished again. On 26.06.2006, the first respondent addressed the petitioner acknowledging receipt of said copies from the petitioner and sought details of the vehicle owner and proof of freight payment. As no ‘end use certificate’ has been issued by the first respondent and furnishing of an ‘end use certificate’ to the second respondent is mandated, the second respondent proposed to invoke the bank guarantee executed on behalf of the petitioner (as an interim security for the period between the petitioner’s application for an ‘end use certificate’ and the submission of ‘end use certificate’ by the first respondent). The second respondent on 27.10.2008 addressed the third respondent to invoke the bank guarantee furnished by the third respondent on behalf of the petitioner for Rs.18,50,000/-. Aggrieved thereby, the writ petition is filed. The respective learned counsel are now agreed that on the petitioner furnishing afresh a set documents in support of its application for ‘end use certificate’ on 11.12.2008 to the first respondent, the first respondent shall pass an order on the petitioner’s application for ‘end use certificate’ by 20.12.2008. The learned Assistant Solicitor General for India appearing for respondents 1 and 2 also agrees to this time frame, for the first respondent for passing an order on the application of the petitioner for issuance of an ‘end use certificate’. On the basis of the conjoint submission of the learned counsel, the writ petition is disposed of directing the first respondent to receive the documents to be submitted by the petitioner on 11.12.2008 in support of its application for issuance of an ‘end use certificate’ in respect of 3000 metric tonnes of shredded scrap imported by it. The first respondent is further directed to pass an order on the petitioner’s application for an ‘end use certificate’, on or before 20.12.2008 and communicate the same to the petitioner on or before the said date. No costs. This Court by the order, dated 06.11.2008, directed the parties to maintain status quo with respect to invoking the bank guarantee (a proposal initiated by the second respondent by the letter, dated 27.10.2008, addressed to the third respondent seeking to invoke bank guarantee furnished on behalf of the petitioner). In the circumstances, the second respondent is directed not to act on the earlier letter, dated 27.10.2008, proposing to invoke bank guarantee, for a period of three weeks from today. _____________________ GODA RAGHURAM, J __________________________ P.V.SANJAY KUMAR, J 10.12.2008 VGB