![]() Tuesday, Aug 20, 2002 |
| National | ||
|
News:
Front Page |
National |
Southern States |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Miscellaneous |
Advts: Classifieds | Employment | Obituary | National
By Our Legal Correspondent
During `mention' time on July 30, when the court declined to stay the impugned judgment, an undertaking was given that the licences would be extended till August 15 and again on August 9 it was submitted that the licences would be extended till August 31. Today a Bench comprising Justice G.B. Pattanaik, Justice Ruma Pal and Justice K.G. Balakrishnan reserved orders at the conclusion of arguments by senior counsel for the State, K.K. Venugopal and P. Chidambaram, senior counsel for the respondent-licencees. Mr. Venugopal, citing a Supreme Court judgment said that the renewal of licence was not automatic, and `renewal clause' was brought about by a change of policy, under which the minimum offtake for each licencee was fixed. He also drew the Court's attention that only 319 out of the 5,512 licencees had paid the licence amount by July 31 and as such the rest had not complied with the High Court's direction. Mr. Chidambaram submitted that nowhere in the G.O. the condition of lifting of minimum stock was mentioned and for the first time the Government was giving this reason for not renewing the licences. Regarding non-payment of the licence amount by July 31, he said the authorities had refused to accept the amount citing that the matter was pending in the Supreme Court.
Printer friendly
page
News:
Front Page |
National |
Southern States |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Miscellaneous |
|
|
|
The Hindu Group: Home | About Us | Copyright | Archives | Contacts | Subscription Group Sites: The Hindu | Business Line | The Sportstar | Frontline | Home |
Copyright © 2002, The
Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the contents of
this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of
The Hindu
|