2022 (2) TMI 156 - HC - Customs

Petitioner Granted Relief under Article 226: Online SEIS Application Allowed, FTP Scheme Deadline Extended

The court granted the Petitioner's request for relief under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, allowing them to file an online application for SEIS ... Liberty to file online application for SEIS and other benefits - processing of application in accordance with law - interim protection pending adjudication of writ petition - acceptance of online application despite deletion of entry - outcome of writ petition to govern final entitlementLiberty to file online application for SEIS and other benefits - processing of application in accordance with law - Petitioner permitted to file online application for SEIS and other benefits and such application shall be processed in accordance with law. - HELD THAT: - The Court, having noted that an identical question is pending in earlier writ petitions and in the interest of protecting parties' rights, granted the Petitioner leave to submit an online application for SEIS and other benefits which form part of the petition. The order expressly provides that any application received pursuant to this liberty shall be processed according to law, preserving the statutory and administrative framework for adjudication. The Court proceeded on an interim basis to enable the petitioner's access to the portal and to ensure statutory processes are not circumvented while the writ petition is pending.Petitioner may file the online application and the application, if received, shall be processed in accordance with law.Acceptance of online application despite deletion of entry - interim protection pending adjudication of writ petition - Respondents directed to accept the Petitioner's online application on the portal if submitted on or before 31 January 2022 notwithstanding deletion of the Petitioner's entry. - HELD THAT: - Counsel for the Petitioner explained that the Petitioner's entry has been deleted from the respondents' records, which might prevent online submission or cause rejection. To obviate prejudice, the Court directed the respondents to accept any application submitted on the portal by the petitioner within the stipulated interim period. The direction is protective and procedural, leaving all contentions regarding eligibility and merits open for adjudication in the writ petition.Respondents must accept the Petitioner's online application on the portal if submitted on or before 31 January 2022, with merits and eligibility kept open.Outcome of writ petition to govern final entitlement - interim protection pending adjudication of writ petition - Any decision on the application including denial of benefits under the impugned notification shall be subject to and governed by the ultimate outcome of the writ petition; respondents permitted to file affidavit-in-reply by 15 March 2022. - HELD THAT: - The Court made clear that the interim directions do not pre-empt the final adjudication; any processing, decision or denial arising from applications filed pursuant to this order will remain subject to the eventual decision in the writ petition. Simultaneously, the respondents were granted time to file an affidavit-in-reply by a specified date, with provision for rejoinder, thereby preserving adversarial process and permitting the merits to be canvassed and decided in due course.Decisions on applications remain subject to the final outcome of the writ petition; respondents to file affidavit-in-reply by 15 March 2022 with opportunity for rejoinder.Final Conclusion: Interim directions granted permitting the Petitioner to submit an online application for SEIS and related benefits by 31 January 2022; respondents directed to accept such application on the portal despite deletion of entry, the application to be processed in accordance with law, and any final entitlement to remain subject to the outcome of the writ petition, with respondents given liberty to file their affidavit-in-reply. Issues:1. Relief sought under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.2. Extension of deadline for submitting applications for Scrip based FTP Schemes.3. Petitioner seeking additional reliefs compared to other writ petitions.4. Request for time to file an affidavit-in-reply.5. Decision on allowing the Petitioner to file an online application for benefits.6. Timeline for filing affidavit-in-reply and rejoinder.Analysis:1. The Petitioner sought various reliefs under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The Counsel highlighted a previous order allowing the Petitioner to file an online application for SEIS benefits by a specified date, subject to pending writ petitions.2. The Counsel for the Petitioner referred to a notification extending the deadline for submitting applications for Scrip based FTP Schemes until a later date. The Petitioner aimed to benefit from one of the schemes mentioned in this notification and requested a similar order from the court to submit the application by the extended deadline.3. The Petitioner's Counsel pointed out that the reliefs sought in the present writ petition were partly different from those in other writ petitions. The court acknowledged this distinction.4. The Respondent's Counsel sought time to file an affidavit-in-reply, which the court considered without prejudice to either party. The court intended to protect the interests of both parties by passing an order similar to a previous one in related writ petitions.5. The court allowed the Petitioner to file an online application for SEIS and other benefits mentioned in the petition. It was clarified that such applications would be processed according to the law, with outcomes subject to the ongoing writ petition.6. A timeline was set for the Respondents to file an affidavit-in-reply and for the Petitioner to provide a rejoinder, ensuring both parties had the opportunity to present their arguments before the court. Additionally, the court directed the Respondents to accept the Petitioner's online application by a specified date, keeping the eligibility issue open for further consideration.This detailed analysis covers the various issues addressed in the judgment, outlining the legal arguments presented by both parties and the court's decisions on each matter.