DBCWP NO.13519/09. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR. O R D E R D.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.13519/2009. M/s.Nola Ram Dulichand Dal Mills & Anr. Vs. Union of India & Ors. Date of order : 18/10/2010. HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE ARUN MISHRA HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ Shri Sameer Jain for the petitioners. Shri M.S. Raghav for the respondents. ****** Heard finally learned counsel for the parties. Petitioners are assailing the show cause notices as well as clarification which has been issued on 21/1/2009. Prayer made in the writ petition is to quash and set-aside the circular dated 21/1/2009 Ann.14 being contrary to the Foreign Trade Policy 2004-2009 and also to quash and set-aside the proceedings initiated by show cause notices dated 10/10/2007 and 30/7/2008 issued by respondents No.5 and 3 as well as to quash and set-aside the order dated 23/8/2007 passed by respondent No.6. DBCWP NO.13519/09. 2 Same petitioners have preferred writ petitions at the main seat at Jodhpur in which, the prayer was made to quash the show cause notice dated 9/10/2007 and order dated 23/8/2008. Same show cause notices have been assailed/orders have been assailed in the instant writ petition. On the previous occasion, the main seat at Jodhpur has dismissed DBCWP Nos.6551/2007 and 7326/2007 vide following common order dated 18/8/2008:- "We have heard counsel for the parties. By these writ applications, the show cause notice as contained in Annexure 9 dated 9.10.07 issued in Writ Petition No.7326/07 and order dated 23.8.08 as contained in Annexure 10 issued in Writ Petition No.6551/07 respectively are under challenge. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that pursuant to the show cause notice issued in Writ Petition No.7326/07, the writ petitioner requested the Joint Director General of Foreign Trade, Jaipur to supply the documents as referred in the show cause notice so as to the effective show cause within a period of one month but, the request of the writ petitioners remained unheeded. Mr.Mehta, learned counsel very frankly submitted that still he is ready to file the show cause provided, the documents as referred in his request letter Annexure 10 are supplied to him. It is further submitted that in Writ Petition No.6551/07, the order was passed by the authorities as contained in Annexure 7, without giving him a show cause notice or affording an opportunity of personal hearing. Learned counsel in this view of the matter submitted that his reply to the show cause notice and a representation in Writ Petition No.6551/07 may be considered and disposed of by the authorities without being influenced by the decision taken by the Grievance Committee dated 6.3.07. Mr.Vivek Shrimali, learned counsel appearing for the respondents however, has no objection to the aforesaid proposal of learned counsel for the petitioners and DBCWP NO.13519/09. 3 submits that the relevant documents as referred to in the show cause shall be supplied to the writ petitioners within a period of one month from today. Keeping in view these aspects of the matter and on the basis of the submission made by the learned counsel for the parties, the writ petitioners are directed to file reply to the show cause notice and also a representation where no show cause notice was issued within a period of one month from the date of receipt of the documents supplied by the respondents. The respondent authorities thereupon shall dispose of the reply to show cause and the representation, if any, filed on behalf of the petitioners after giving an opportunity of hearing to the parties without being prejudiced by the decision taken, if any, by the Grievance Committee as referred to above. With these directions, these writ applications are disposed of. Sd/- sd/- (SANGEET LODHA), J. (NARAYAN ROY) CJ." Justification for filing the instant writ petition as contended by the learned counsel apearing on behalf of the petitioners is that a clarification has been issued on 21/1/2009 by the Government of India, Ministry of Commerce & Industry Department of Commerce Directorate General of Foreign Trade with the approval of DGFT. Thus, counsel appearing for petitioners submitted that as the circular is binding, no fruitful purpose will be served by approaching the respondents. He has placed reliance on the judgment of Apex Court in Commissioner of C.Ex., Bolpur Vs. Ratan Melting & Wire Industries : 2008 (231) E.L.T. 22 (S.C.). After hearing learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, we are of the opinion that Circular DBCWP NO.13519/09. 4 dated 21/1/2009 is clarificatory in nature. It is with reference to certain facts with respect to the policies and develovements of the banks. Once, the show cause notices were assailed in this Court and vide order dated 18/8/2008 this Court has directed adjudication on merits of show cause notices to which recourse, petitioners have also agreed as mentioned in the aforesaid order, we are not inclined to interfere with the show cause notices at this stage merely on the basis of aforesaid clarification which has been issued. It would be proper that petitioners should first answer the show cause notice and to wait for a decision on merit and if decision goes against their interest, they may assail it in accordance with law. It is open to the petitioners to raise objections while agitating show cause notices. At this stage, counsel has submitted that authority at Chennai has issued show cause notice, which is illegal. In view of decision in prvious writ petitions, we are not inclined to interfere at this stage. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. (MOHAMMAD RAFIQ), J. (ARUN MISHRA), J. anil/-