9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
1. Whether the Central Government can grant an industrial license for the manufacture of specialized Silica in collaboration with a foreign company. 2. Whether the product proposed to be manufactured falls under the reserved category for Small Scale Sector. 3. Whether the Technical Evaluation Committee's decision regarding the classification of the product is legally sound. 4. Whether the petitioners are entitled to inspect various documents related to the application and decision-making process. Analysis: 1. The petition challenges the Central Government's potential grant of an industrial license to manufacture specialized Silica by a manufacturer in collaboration with a foreign company. The petitioners seek to restrain the government from enabling the establishment of this industrial undertaking, citing that the product is essentially precipitated Silica, which falls under the Small Scale Sector reservation. The petition also opposes the proposed foreign collaboration for manufacturing these specialized Silica grades. 2. The dispute revolves around the classification of the product to be manufactured by the third respondent. The petitioners argue that the product, including five specific grades of Silica, should be reserved for the Small Scale Sector. The technology for Small Scale Sector manufacturing, provided by a research institute, does not include spray drying, a costly process integral to the proposed manufacturing process. The capital investment for the proposed plant far exceeds the threshold for Small Scale Sector classification. 3. The Technical Evaluation Committee evaluated the proposed manufacturing process and product grades. After considering factors such as cost, market price, import substitution, and industry needs, the Committee concluded that the specialized Silica grades are not within the Small Scale Sector reservation. Despite the technical similarity to precipitated Silica, the Committee classified these grades as specialized Silica due to their unique properties, production process, and market demand. The Court upheld the Committee's decision, emphasizing the need for import substitution and the substantial capital investment required for manufacturing these grades. 4. The petitioners sought to inspect various documents related to the application process and decision-making. The Court allowed inspection of specific minutes summarizing the evaluation process but rejected broader access to all requested documents. The Court deemed it unnecessary for the petitioners to inspect additional documents beyond those already considered in the case, emphasizing the sufficiency of the material presented during the proceedings. In conclusion, the Court dismissed the petition and the Chamber Summons, upholding the decision to grant an industrial license for manufacturing specialized Silica grades in collaboration with a foreign company. The judgment affirms the classification of these grades as specialized Silica rather than precipitated Silica reserved for the Small Scale Sector, based on the evaluation of technical aspects, market dynamics, and capital investment requirements.
|
