IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.931 of 2011 M/S SUN BIO MANUFACTURING PRIVATE LIMITED, HAVING ITS INDUSTRIAL UNIT AT DAHARIA MILLS, KATIHAR, BIHAR AND HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT 89, NETAJI SUBHASH ROAD, 1ST FLOOR, KOLKATA-700001, THROUGH ITS DIRECTOR, DAMODAR PRASAD BHATTAR, SON OF LT. DWARKA PRASAD BHATTAR, RESIDENT OF THE BARNAGORE JUTE FACTORY, 284, M.N.K. ROAD, P.O. ALAM BAZAR, P.S. BARANGAGORE, DISTRICT 24-PARGANA (NORTH), KOLKATA-35, WEST BENGAL. …….PETITIONER. VERSUS 1. THE UNION OF INDIA, THROUGH THE DIRECTOR GENERAL, BUREAU OF INDIAN STANDARDS, MANAK BHAWAN, 9, BAHADUR SHAH ZAFAR MARG, NEW DELHI- 110002. 2. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL, BUREAU OF INDIAN STANDARDS, MANAK BHAWAN, 9, BAHADUR SHAH ZAFAR MARG, NEW DELHI-110002. 3. DIRECTOR & HEAD, BUREAU OF INDIAN STANDARDS, PATNA BRANCH OFFICE, PATLIPUTRA INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, PATNA-800013. 4. M/S. SUN BIO TECHNOLOGY LIMITED, HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT MILANPUR REHABARI, GAUHATI, ASSAM AND HAVING ITS ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE AT 21A, SHAKESPEARE SARANI, P.S. SHAKESPEARE SARANI, KOLKATA-700017, THROUGH ITS DIRECTOR, RAMAWATAR ASHOPA. 5. M/S SUN BIOTECHNOLOGY LTD. A COMPANY WITHIN THE MEANING OF THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956, HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT MILANPUR, REHABARI, GAUHATI, ASSAM AND HAVING ITS ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE AT 21A, SHAKESPEARE SARANI, P.S. SHAKESPEARE SARANI, KOLKATA-700017 THROUGH ITS DIRECTOR SOURAV BANERJEE SON OF SRI SANTOSH KUMAR BANERJEE. ---------- For the petitioner : Mr. Jitendra Singh, Senior Advocate with Mr. Suraj Samdarshi, Advocate. For respondent nos.1 to 3 : Mr. Rashid Izhar, Advocate. For respondent no.4 : Mr. Mrigank Mauli, Advocate. For respondent no.5 : Mr. Y.V.Giri, Senior Advocate with Mr. Raju Giri, Advocate. ----------- 10/ 01.03.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the Union of India and the authorities of Bureau of - 2 - Indian Standards (respondent nos. 1 to 3), learned counsel for respondent no.4 as well as learned counsel for the newly added intervener respondent no.5. 2. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging communication dated 02.11.2010 (Annexure-11) by which the Director and Head of Bureau of Indian standards, Patna Branch Office (respondent no.3) deferred the renewal of petitioner’s licence for getting its product market as of ISI standard till 29th of April, 2011 and for other ancillary reliefs. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has stated that there was an agreement between the petitioner and respondent no.4 (M/s. Sun Bio technology Limited through its Director Ramawatar Ashopa) dated 07.02.2009 and in any view of the matter production of any such agreement was not a condition precedent for grant or renewal of such licence. 4. Learned counsel for the Union of India as well as the authorities of Bureau of Indian Standards (respondent nos. 1 to 3) submits that licence cannot be granted or renewed until there is an agreement between the petitioner and respondent no.4 and since the said agreement was under dispute, therefore, the matter was deferred till 29th of April, 2011 to enable the petitioner to produce such agreement for grant of renewal. 5. Respondent no.4 is M/s. Sun Bio Technology Limited through its Director Ramawatar Ashopa, whereas respondent no.5 is M/s Sun Biotechnology Ltd. through its - 3 - Director Sourav Banerjee. Both of them dispute the existence of each other and claim themselves to be the real Director and representative of M/s Sun Bio Technology Limited. Such a dispute between respondent nos. 4 and 5 is not in issue in the instant writ petition. 6. In the aforesaid facts and circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the Director & Head of Bureau of Indian Standards, Patna Branch Office, Patliputra Industrial Estate, Patna-800013 (respondent no.3) to take up the matter afresh. The petitioner as well as respondent no.4 and respondent no.5 are directed to appear before the said authority within fifteen days from today and no separate notice to them for that purpose is required. The said authority shall also issue notice and call the above named Ramawatar Ashopa whom the petitioner and respondent no.4 claim to be Director of M/s. Sun Bio Technology Limited and respondent no.5 disputes the said fact. The aforesaid respondent no.3 shall give an opportunity of hearing to all the said persons and decide the question as to whether Ramawatar Ashopa was the Director of M/s. Sun Bio Technology Limited on the relevant date and had signed the lease agreement. The said authority will consider and decide the matter of renewal of petitioner’s licence. If the renewal sought by the petitioner is found to be fulfilling all the requirements as prescribed in law, then the said application/request of the petitioner must be allowed. However, if the said respondent finds that the said - 4 - application/request of the petitioner for renewal does not fulfill the requirement of law, then the said application/request of the petitioner shall be rejected by a speaking order within two months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. The petitioner must approach the said authority along with a copy of this order within fifteen days from today. Sunil (S. N. Hussain, J.)