Agricultural and Processed Food Products Export Development Authority (Apeda) v. Union of India and 2 Ors

PageoNo.#o1/4 GAHC010280742023 ooooooo ooooooooooooooo ooooooooooooooooTHEoGAUHATIoHIGHoCOURTo (HIGHoCOURToOFoASSAM,oNAGALAND,oMIZORAMoANDoARUNACHALoPRADESH)o CaseoNo.o:oI.A.(Civil)/3708/2023o AGRICULTURALoANDoPROCESSEDoFOODoPRODUCTSoEXPORTo DEVELOPMENToAUTHORITYo(APEDA)o MINISTRYoOFoCOMMERCEoANDoINDUSTRIES,oGOVT.oOFoINDIA,o3RDo FLOOR,oNCUIoBUILDING,o3,oSIRIoINDUSTRIALoAREA,oAUGUSToKRANTIo MARG,oNEWoDELHI-16,oREPRESENTEDoBYoITSoASSISTANToGENERALo MANAGER,oREGIONALoOFFICE,oGUWAHATI 2:oMS.oSUNITAoRAI oASSTT.oGENERALoMANAGER oAGRICULTURALoANDoPROCESSEDoFOODoPRODUCTSoEXPORTo DEVELOPMENToAUTHORITYoAPEDA oMINISTRYoOFoCOMMERCEoANDoINDUSTRIES oJAINoCOMPLEX o3RDoFLOOR oG.S.oROAD oGHY-o VERSUSo UNIONoOFoINDIAoANDo2oORSo REPRESENTEDoBYoSECRETARY,oGOVT.oOFoINDIA,oMINISTRYoOFoLABOURo ANDoEMPLOYMENToSHARAMoSHAKTIoBHAWAN,oRAFIoMARG,oNEWoDELHI 2:BINODoCH.oBARMAN oC/OoSRIoJOGENDRAoNATHBORAH oHOUSEoNO.598 oANANDAoNAGAR oCHRISTIANoBASTI oNEARoSANIoMANDIR oGHY-5 3:THEoASSTT.oLABOURoCOMMISSIONERoCENTRAL oCUMoCONTROLLINGoAUTHORITYoUNDERoTHEoPAYMENToOFoGRATUITYo Page No.# 2/4 ACT 1972 KENDRIYA SHRAM SADAN RK MISSION ROAD BIRUBARI GHY-1 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR C P SHARMA Advocate for the Respondent : DY.S.G.I. Linked Case : WA No. 15176/2023 (Filing Number) AGRICULTURAL AND PROCESSED FOOD PRODUCTS EXPORT DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (APEDA) VERSUS UNION OF INDIA AND 2 ORS F ------------ Advocate for : MR C P SHARMA Advocate for : appearing for UNION OF INDIA AND 2 ORS F Linked Case : I.A. (Civil) No. 15177/2023 AGRICULTURAL AND PROCESSED FOOD PRODUCTS EXPORT DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (APEDA) VERSUS UNION OF INDIA AND 2 ORS F ------------ Advocate for : MR C P SHARMA Advocate for : appearing for UNION OF INDIA AND 2 ORS F

Page No.# 3/4 BEFORE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANASH RANJAN PATHAK HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MITALI THAKURIA

11/01/2024 (M.R. Pathak, J) Heard Mr. C P Sharma, learned Senior counsel assisted by Mr. K R Borooah, learned counsel for the applicants. Also heard Mr. S S Roy, learned CGC for the opposite party Nos. 1 & 3 and Mr. L C Dey, learned counsel for the opposite party No. 2. On 13.12.2023, it was already recorded that there was a delay of 29 days in preferring the connected writ appeal against the judgment and order dated 07.09.2023 passed by the learned Single Judge in WP(C) No. 857/2013. Mr. Roy, learned CGC and Mr. Dey, learned counsel for the opposite parties have no objection in condoning the delay of 29 days in preferring the connected writ appeal by the applicants against the judgment and order dated 07.09.2023 passed in WP(C) No. 857/2013. From the perusal of the applications, we found that the applicants could show sufficient reason for the delay in preferring the connected appeal against the judgment and order dated

07.09.2023. Considering the above, the delay of 29 days in preferring the connected writ appeal by the present applicants as appellant against the judgment and order dated 07.09.2023 passed by the learned Single Judge in WP(C) No. 857/2013 is hereby condoned. Registry shall accordingly register and number the connected writ appeal and shall list the matter for admission on 08.02.2024.

JUDGE JUDGE Page No.# 4/4 Comparing Assistant