Sankalp Industries Pvt. Ltd v. The Union of India through Secretary Bureau of Indian Standards, 9
Case at a glance
Outcome
Disposed of
Petition stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms
Provisions considered
Judgment
The Union of India through Secretary Bureau of Indian Standards, 9 Bahadur Sah Jafar Marg, New Delhi-110202.
The Director General (D.G.) 9 Bahadur, Sah Zafar Marg New Delhi-110002, India.
The Addl Director General (A.D.G.) 9 Bahadur, Sah Zafar Marg New Delhi- 110002, India.
The Administrative Officer, 1/14 CTT, Scheme VII, V.I.P. Road, Kankura Gachi, Kolkata-700054.
The Bureau of Indian Standards through its Deputy Director General, Eastern Region, Patliputra Industrial Estate, Patna.. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s
Mr. Uday Prasad Singh, Advocate : For the Union of India : Mr. Manoj Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Bureau of Indian Standards: Mr. Y.V.Giri, Sr. Advocate Mr. Awadhesh Kumar, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) Date : 19-01-2023 As prayed for by Mr. Y.V.Giri, learned Senior Counsel, Respondent No. 5, namely, Bureau of Indian Standard through its Regional Director, Patna Branch, Patliputra Patna High Court CWJC No.10152 of 2021 dt.19-01-2023 Industrial Estate, Patna stands corrected and read as “ Bureau of Indian Standards through its Deputy Director General, Eastern Region, Patliputra Industrial Estate, Patna.” Registry to make necessary correction in the memo of parties, both in the digital as also physical file. Petitioner has prayed for the following relief(s): “(i) The respondent be command to issue renewal certificate for Bureau of Indian Standards.
(ii) The respondents be commands to allow the petitioner to work in question which has been issued earlier. (iii) The petitioner be examined any other relief/reliefs for which found entitled.” In view of the stand taken by the respondents and more so, in view of the Bureau of Indian Standards (Conformity Assessment) Regulations, 2018; Clause 8(4) which is extracted hereunder:-
Renewal of license to use or apply a Standard Mark- (1) An application for renewal of licence shall be made to the Bureau in the stipulated form along with the fee, as specified in the applicable Scheme in Schedule-II. (2) The application under sub-regulation (1) shall be made to the Bureau before the expiry of the validity of licence as specified in the applicable Scheme given in Schedule-II. (3) On receipt of an application under sub- Patna High Court CWJC No.10152 of 2021 dt.19-01-2023 regulation (1), the Bureau may renew or recertify the licence in accordance with the applicable Scheme specified in Schedule-II. (4) If renewal application with requisite fee is not received before the expiration of the validity, the renewal of licence may be deferred for a period of up to ninety days from the date of its validity; Provided that if renewal application with requisite fee is not received within the period of deferment, the licence shall stand expired after the date of its validity.
, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks liberty to apply for fresh license in terms of the Bureau of Indian Standards Act, 2016 and the rules/regulations framed thereunder.
Operative part
Liberty, as prayed for, is granted. In any event, the petitioner has a right to do so under the rules/regulations. Needless to add, as and when any such application is preferred before the competent authority, which is, according to Mr. Y.V.Giri, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondent No. 5, Bureau of Indian Standards through its Deputy Director General, Eastern Region, Patliputra Industrial Estate, Patna, the same shall be processed and decided expeditiously in accordance with law. Petition stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms. Patna High Court CWJC No.10152 of 2021 dt.19-01-2023 Interlocutory Application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. (Sanjay Karol, CJ) ( Partha Sarthy, J) Saurabh/Sujit AFR/NAFR CAV DATE Uploading Date Transmission Date
21.01.2023
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: Petition stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Bureau of Indian Standards Act, 2016.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.