2026 (3) TMI 213

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....isions (MOM No. 01/23 dated 07.04.2022 and MOM No. 211 AM23 dated 02.12.2022) (Annexure-PI), being discriminatory, arbitrary, capricious and violative of Article 14 and 19( 1)(g) of the Constitution; b) Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction relaxing the time limit for filing claims for assistance under TMA for quarters ending September 2019 and December 2019 in terms of Hon'ble Supreme Court Suo Moto Orders; c) Issue a writ in nature of Mandamus directing the Respondent No. 2 and its officers to allow Petitioner to file claims for assistance under TMA for the quarters ending September 2019 and December 2019 after reopening the DGFT Portal or manually; and d) Issue any other writ order or direction, whi....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....FT portal prompted that the time-period for filing TMA applications had expired. 4. The sole grievance raised by the petitioner is that the case was considered by the Competent Committee as case No. 26 in its meeting dated 07.04.2022 and the said Committee rejected the petitioner's case without considering the facts and circumstances which were pointed out. The petitioner also submits that in the review proceedings, the Review Committee has not bestowed consideration to similarly situated cases and has rejected the same without assigning any cogent reason. 5. The minutes of meeting dated 07.04.2022 are extracted as under:- "Case No. 26 M/s. Mccain Foods India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi F. No. HORPRCAPPLY00135236AM22 ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi F. No. HQRPRCAPPLY00001337AM23 Meeting No. 21/AM23 held on 02.12.2022 (Subject: Condonation for delay in submission of 2 online TMA application for the period July 2019 to September 2019 and (il) October 2019 to December 2019.) The applicant had sought personal hearing in terms of Para 2.59 of FTP-2015-2020, which was afforded on 02.12.2022, Shri Rajat Dosi, Partner appeared on behalf of the firm and made the following submissions: This is the review case of PRC Meeting No.01/AM23 dated 07.04.2022(Case No. 26)) (wherein the Committee rejected the case. The applicant has filed application for review the decision of the Committee and stated that due to the Covid-19 pand....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....pplemented by fresh reasons in the shape of affidavit or otherwise. Otherwise, an order bad in the beginning may, by the time it comes to court on account of a challenge, get validated by additional grounds later brought out. We may here draw attention to the observations of Bose, J. in Gordhandas Bhanji [Commr. of Police, Bombay v. Gordhandas Bhanji, 1951 SCC 1088 : AIR 1952 SC 16]: "Public orders, publicly made, in exercise of a statutory authority cannot be construed in the light of explanations subsequently given by the officer making the order of what he meant, or of what was in his mind, or what he intended to do. Public orders made by public authorities are meant to have public effect and are intended to affect the actings a....