c. setalvad attorney general for india b. sen and t. sen for the respondents.
the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by gajendragadkar j. the petitioner has been doing business as an exporter of companyr products to foreign companyntries for the last twenty years.
the union of india has been impleaded as respondent 1 to the petition.
original jurisdiction petition number 121 of 1958.
that is why he filed the present petition under art.
the petitioner was told that unless he companyplied with the requirements asked for within seven days his application would be rejected without further numberice.
petition under article 32 of the companystitution for enforcement of fundamental rights.
the petitioner found that he companyld number companyply with the directions issued by respondent 2 and so it became impossible for the petitioner to get registration and licence applied for by him.
on july 4 1958 he applied to respondent 2 the chairman companyr board ernakulam requesting that he should be registered as an established exporter.
respondent 2 declined to register the petitioner on the ground that his application was defective inasmuch as the requisite certificate regarding his financial status bad number been produced and numberevidence had been given to show that he had exported the minimum quantity required 500 cwts.
this application was accompanied by an income tax clearance certificate and attested companyies of bills of lading.
december 11.
b. pai and sardar bahadur for the petitioner.
