IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 23299 of 2005(W)
1. M/S.GODREJ & BOYCE MFG.CO.LTD.,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE INTELLIGENCE INSPECTOR,
... Respondent
2. THE INTELLIGENCE OFFICER,
3. THE MANAGER,CENTRAL BANK OF INDIA,
For Petitioner :SRI.V.P.SUKUMAR
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.M.JOSEPH
Dated :14/08/2008
O R D E R
K.M. JOSEPH, J.
````````````````````````````````````````````````````
W.P.(C) No. 23299 OF 2005 W
````````````````````````````````````````````````````
Dated this the 14th day of August, 2008
J U D G M E N T
Petitioner has approached this Court being aggrieved
by Ext.P12. By Ext.P12, the intelligence officer has issued a
communication to the Manager of the Central Bank of India, the 3rd
respondent, to forward the D.D. for the amount covered by the
bank guarantee at the earliest otherwise the matter has been
reported to the Banking Ombudsman. Case of the petitioner in
brief is as follows. Petitioner is a company which despatched
compressors after repair from Maharashtra by Exts.P1 and P2.
Ext.P3 notice was issued directing security. Petitioner remitted the
amounts under protest. Ext.P4 dated 4.6.2004 is issued by the 2nd
respondent asking the petitioner to appear on 14.6.2004, with
books of account and later the hearing was adjourned to 9.7.2004.
On 1.7.2004 the 2nd respondent again directed the 3rd respondent
to renew the bank guarantee for one year. It was renewed by
Ext.P8 letter. Thereafter, on 9.7.2004, according to the petitioner,
he appeared before the 2nd respondent as directed in Ext.P5 and
WPC.23299/08
: 2 :
the 2nd respondent verified the books of account and at the time of
hearing, the petitioner submitted Ext.P7 letter explaining the
details of goods detained by Ext.P3. The 2nd respondent again
issued Ext.P9 notice directing the petitioner to appear before him
on 8.7.2005 with books of account. On the same day, the 2nd
respondent issued Ext.P10 directing the 3rd respondent to renew
the bank guarantee which was duly complied with as evident by
Ext.P13. Petitioner filed Ext.P7 reply to the 2nd respondent
pointing out that he had appeared before him on 9.7.2004 with
books of account and that if any more clarification is required, he
is willing to provide the same on getting information in that regard.
It is while so, Ext.P12 letter is issued.
2. When the matter came up today, learned Government
Pleader, on instructions, submits that by mistake an order came to
be passed on 4.6.2004 without noticing that the petitioner had
been called upon to appear on 9.7.2004 vide Ext.P5 notice.
Learned Government Pleader also submits that the said order was
not communicated and a fresh order will be passed. In such
circumstances, Ext.P12 is quashed and there will be a direction to
WPC.23299/08
: 3 :
the 2nd respondent to consider the matter and take a decision in
accordance with law, after affording an opportunity for hearing to
the petitioner, within a period of two months from the date of
receipt of a copy of this judgment. I am not pronouncing on the
contention relatable to prayer No.(ii) and I leave it open.
Writ petition is disposed of as above.
Sd/-
(K.M.JOSEPH, JUDGE)
aks
/TRUE COPY/
P.A.TO JUDGE