1 mgj IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Writ Petition No. 10289 of 2009 Kelloggs India Private Limited ..Petitioners vs. 1 The Union of India & ors ..Respondents Mr.H.Hidayatullha, Sr.Counsel i/b D.S.K.Legal for petitioners. Mr.M.I.Sethna, Sr.Counsel with Mr.J.B.Mishra for respondents. CORAM: V.C.DAGA AND K.K.TATED JJ 22nd March,2010 P.C. Perused the petition. 1 Heard the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioners and respondents respectively. 2 This petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is seeking a writ in the nature of direction against the respondents directing them to supply three 2 documents listed herein below: (i) The test reports in entirety (ii) Document disclosing methodology adopted for test by the respondent department. (iii) The material relied upon in support of the test by the respondent department. 4 Mr.Hidayutullha submits that keeping in mind the principles of natural justice, the respondents are bound to supply the aforesaid three documents sought by the petitioners so as to enable them to show cause. 5 On being asked Mr.Sethana, for the Revenue submits that so far as the test reports are concerned the same are already disclosed by the department in its entirety as reproduced by the petitioners themselves on pages 34, 36, 38,39, 40, 42, 43 and 44 of the petition. He further submits that beyond these documents there are no other test reports with the respondent Department. 3 6 Mr. Sethana with respect to the second item regarding specific methodology adopted for conducting the test is concerned, submits that the methodology as prescribed in the bromine is adopted. The copy of which has already been handed over to the petitioners. The photo copy thereof is retained on record and marked X-1 for identification. 7 Mr.Sethana has handed over the document relating to the third item listed herein below showing proportions or percentage used while conducting the test. Photo copy thereof is retained on record and marked X-2 for identification. 8 In the above view of the matter, the grievances canvassed by the petitioners do not survive. 9 The petition is thus allowed to be withdrawn keeping all the contentions on merits open. 10 The petitioners would be at liberty 4 to file their reply to the show cause notice within 3 weeks. Thereafter, if necessary, it would be open for the petitioners to apply for cross examination and to proceed with the matter in accordance with law. 11 We make it clear that so far as three documents referred to above are concerned, Mr.Sethana submits that there are no further documents with the revenue on these counts. 12 Writ petition stands dismissed as withdrawn with liberty reserved with no order as to costs. (K.K.TATED J.) (V.C.DAGA J.)