IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC FRIDAY, THE 14TH MARCH 2008 / 24TH PHALGUNA 1929 WP(C).No. 5738 of 2008(G) -------------------------------- PETITIONER: -------------- AJITH KUMAR GUPTHA, THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, FLORA TEXTILES, COWCOODY CHAMBERS, IIND FLOOR, 234-A, RACE COURSE ROAD, COIMBATORE. BY ADV. SRI.P.V.JAYACHANDRAN SRI.M.S.SAJEEV KUMAR RESPONDENTS: ----------------- 1. DIRECTOR GENERAL OF FOREIGN TRADE, MINISTRY OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRY, UDYOG BHAVAN, NEW DELHI. 2. COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, CUSTOMS HOUSE, COCHIN, ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.P.PARAMESWARAN NAIR, ASST. SOLICITOR GEN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14/03/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. =============== W.P.(C) NO. 5738 OF 2008 G ==================== Dated this the 14th day of March, 2008 J U D G M E N T The prayer in this writ petition is to direct the 2nd respondent not to invoke Bank guarantee No.78/95 till a decision on extension of the period of license No.P/CG/2133940 dated 1/3/95 now pending consideration of the Grievance Committee of the 1st respondent is taken. 2. It is seen that EPCG License No. P/CG/2133940 was granted to the petitioner subject to fulfillment of export application. As at present, the petitioner has not fulfilled the said obligation and therefore Bank guarantee furnished as security thereof is liable to be invoked. However, petitioner submits that their request for extension of the period of licence is pending consideration of the Grievance Committee of the 1st respondent and that if the period is extended, there will be no occasion for invoking the Bank guarantee. It is also stated that the Bank guarantee presently furnished is valid till 31/3/2008 and that by letter dated 4/3/2008 received by them subsequent to the filing of this writ petition, the 2nd respondent themselves have required the petitioner to extend the bank guarantee for yet another period of one year. WPC No. 5738/08 :2 : 3. The fact that the request made by the petitioner for extension of the period of licence is pending before the 1st respondent as evident from Ext.P4 communication issued by the petitioner and there is nothing to indicate that the said request of the petitioner has been rejected. Indicating the pendency of its request for extension of licence, petitioner has also made Ext.P5 request to the 2nd respondent requesting not to invoke the bank guarantee until a decision is taken by the 1st respondent. Despite all this petitioner apprehends that Bank Guarantee is likely to be invoked at any time. 4. In view of the pendency of the request for extension before the 1st respondent, I do not think it proper to permit the 2nd respondent to invoke the bank guarantee at this stage. Accordingly, this writ petition will stand disposed of with the following direction. 5. That the 1st respondent shall take a decision on Ext.P4 request made by the petitioner for extension of the period of license No.P/CG/2133940 referred to above and this shall be done by the Grievance Committee of the 1st respondent, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within eight weeks of production of a copy of this judgment. It is directed that in the meanwhile the petitioner shall keep the bank WPC No. 5738/08 :3 : guarantee alive for another period of one year and intimate the same to the 2nd respondent and that its invocation or otherwise will depend upon the decision to be taken by the Grievance Committee of the 1st respondent on the petitioner's request for extension of the EPCG licence. Petitioner shall furnish a copy of this judgment before the 1st respondent for compliance. Writ petition is disposed of as above. Petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment before the 1st and 2nd respondent for compliance. ANTONY DOMINIC,JUDGE. Rp