IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 17TH FEBRUARY 2009 / 28TH MAGHA 1930 WP(C).No. 5209 of 2009(U) ------------------------------- PETITIONER: -------------- ROY PURATHUKAREN, 41 YEARS, S/O.THIMOTHY, R/AT.PURATHUKAREN HOUSE, VAKAYIL LANE, KIZHAKKUMPATTUKARA, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY MR.V.R.KESAVA KAIMAL, ADVOCATE. MR. N.M. MADHU, ADVOCATE. RESPONDENTS: ----------------- 1. DEPARTMENT OF HEAVY INDUSTRIES, MINISTRY OF HEAVY AND PUBLIC ENTERPRISES, REP. BY ITS DIRECTOR, (AEI SECTION), DEPARTMENT OF HEAVY INDUSTRY, UDYOG BHAVAN, NEW DELHI. 2. DEPARTMENT OF CUSTOMS AND CENTRAL EXCISE, MINISTRY OF FINANCE , REP . BY ITS SECRETARY, NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI. 3. MERCEDES-BENZ INDIA (P) LTD., SECTOR 15A - CHIKKALI, PIMPRI, PUNE - 411 018. BY MR. JOHN VARGHESE,SC,CEN.BOARD OF EXCISE FOR R2. MR. P. PARAMESWARAN NAIR, ASST. SOLICITOR GENERAL. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/02/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ------------------------- W.P.(C.) No.5209 of 2009 --------------------------------- Dated, this the 17th day of February, 2009 J U D G M E N T The petitioner submits that he is a physically handicapped person and that his disability is 45%. 2. Ext.P1 is a scheme announced by the Government of India providing for duty concession in respect of Cars, that have been suitably designed to be driven by physically handicapped persons. According to the petitioner, by availing of the benefit of Ext.P1, he wanted to buy a Mercedes Benz C-Class automatic transmission vehicle. Therefore, he made Ext.P2 application to the 1st respondent enclosing an affidavit and a certificate issued by the 3rd respondent. It is stated that a medical certificate was also enclosed to prove his physical disability. Although, the application was made in October, 2008 final orders have not been passed thereon. Therefore, he pursued the matter by filing representations, but, however, those representations remain without any response. It is in these circumstances, the writ petition is filed. 3. As is seen from Ext.P2 and the certificate produced, what WP(C) No.5209/2009 -2- the petitioner claims is the benefit of Ext.P1 scheme for supply of car designed to be driven by physically handicapped customers on concessional rate of excise duty. For that the petitioner has made a claim before the authorities for the benefit of Ext.P1. Therefore, it is for the 1st respondent to take a decision on the claim made. 4. Since a decision on Ext.P2 has not been taken so far, I direct the 1st respondent to consider Ext.P2 in the light of the documents produced by the petitioner and pass final orders thereon. This shall be done as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within three months of production of a copy of this judgment, along with a copy of this writ petition. The writ petition is disposed of as above. (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE) jg