m N $9to 16 K / % 17.01.2011 ^ Present: None for the Petitioners. Mr. Ravinder Agarwal witli Mr. Nitish Gupta, Advocate for Respondent, Ministry of Textiles. Mr. Sachin Datta with Mr. Manikya Klianna, Advocates for Union of India in W.P. (C) No. 1215/2008 Mr. Jatan Singh, Advocate for Union of India in W.P. (C) Nos. 1216 and 1217/2008. Mr. Rajesh Rawal, Advocate for Respondent AEPC. W.P. (C) Nos. 876. 1214,1215,1216,1217,1218,1219, 1220 of 2008 1. Repeatedly adjournment slips have been circulated in these cases. None appears even on the second call for the Petitioners. Obviously the counsel for the Petitionersis taking it for grantedthat the petitionswill be adjourned since an adjoiunmentslip has been circulatedand a 'no objection' has been endorsedtliereonby counsel for the Respondents. There is no warrant for the presumptionthat if an adjournmentslip is circulated,it will be granted and thatno one needsto appearfor the partyon whosebehalfadjournmentis sought, even on second call. 2. The questionin these writpetitionsconcernsthe validityof the actionof the Respondentsin imposingpenaltyand forfeitingearnestmoney deposit Signing Date:30.08.2024 17:10:59 Certify that the digital and physical file have been compared and the digital data is as per the physical file and no page is missing. Signature Not Verified for not fulfilment of the export obligation. It.is pointed out by counselfor the Respondentsthat the issue is covered against the Petitionersby the decision of this Court in Gokaldas Images Ltd v. Union of India 2006 (193) ELT264 (Del). 4. The writ petitions are accordinglydismissed.The pending applicationsare also dismissed. S.MURALIDHAR, J JANUARY 17,2011 ak