IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.1321 OF 2008 Mysore Fruit Prouducts Pvt. Ltd. .... Petitioner V/s. Union of India & Ors. .....Respondents Ms.Chandana Salgaonkar-Radia, for the Petitioner. Mr.Rajendra Kumar and G. Hariharan a/w S.C.Pal instructed by Dr.T.C.Kaushik, for respondent No.1. Mr.Birendra Saraf a/w Sanya Dada Chanji i/b M.K.Ambalal & Co., for the respondent No.2. CORAM : P.B.MAJMUDAR & A.A.SAYED, JJ. DATED : 11th SEPTEMBER, 2008. P.C. 1. By filing this petition, the petitioner has prayed that the letter issued by the respondent No.2 dated 01-03-2007 and 24-04-2007 may be set aside and the respondent No.2 may be directed to consider the application on behalf of the petitioner company for granting approval to the packing credit limits and post shipment limit sought by the petitioner from its bankers on its own merits. 2. This petition is opposed by the respondents on the ground that the petitioner is not entitled to credit limit and post shipment limit in view 2 of the decision taken by respondent No.2. The learned Advocate appearing for respondent No.2 submitted that if the letters in question accepted to give certain facilities on the condition imposed by respondent No.2, which according to respondent No.2 has not been complied with by the petitioner. The said submission is also made by the learned Advocate appearing for respondent No.1. 3. We have heard the learned Advocates appearing in the matter. The learned Advocate Ms.Salgaonkar appearing for the petitioner, submitted that the petitioner is willing to make fresh appropriate representation with appropriate documents to the respondent No.2 in connection with the subject matter. She further submitted that except requesting the Court to give appropriate directions to consider the application on its own merits, she is not pressing any other point in the petition. 4. Considering the said statement, the petitioner is permitted to make representation as deemed fit in accordance with law to the respondent No.2 in connection with the subject matter. The respondent No.2 may take appropriate decision expeditiously within a period of three months from the receipt of the application from the petitioner. The respondent No.2. may take appropriate decision as may deemed fit in 3 accordance with law and may consider the application of the petitioner and after considering the documents on record and may take decision and the same be informed to the petitioner thereafter. It is clarified that simply because this Court has permitted the petitioner to make representation to the respondent No.2, it should not mean that this Court has expressed any opinion about the maintainability of such application and as to whether the petitioner has locus standi or not, as all these questions has to be considered by respondent No.2 on its own merits and all issues are kept open. It is for the respondent No.2 to take appropriate decision in accordance with law. Subject to what is stated hereinabove, the petition is disposed of. ( A.A.SAYED, J. ) ( P.B.MAJMUDAR, J. )