Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

This writ petition has been filed for a certiorarified mandamus challenging the proceedings of the respondent herein dated 15.12.2006 in and by which the petitioner has been invited to pay particular attention to sections IIB and III which are serious issues and require review of documentation and repetition of verification of safety and function tests and asking the petitioner to arrange to send the clarifications/information at the earliest and for consequential direction to include the petitioner's name in the revised list of Models and Manufacturers of Wind Electric Generators/Wind Turbines Equipment issued quarterly.

b. While so, the respondent has a system of publishing list of manufacturers of wind electric generators/wind turbines, in which the petitioner company has always been shown as one of the manufacturers of wind electric generators/wind turbines manufacturers in India. The list of manufacturers contained the name of the petitioner in the category of 250 KW manufactures. The Centre for Wind Energy Technology (hereinafter referred to as C-WET") who is the respondent issues Type Certificates for wind turbines of 250 KW . This certificate had been granted after due evaluation of performance of wind turbines/ wind mills manufactured by the petitioner and the same is valid from 29.12.2005 to 30.9.2006. Accordingly, the petitioner's name had been so included uninterruptedly for the last several years. The conformity evaluation in S.No.PTC 1-010 dated 4.1.06 contains the following clause :

e. The non-inclusion of the petitioner's name has serious consequence, which is akin to blacklisting a manufacturer. The purchasers of wind electric generators/wind mills will normally go by the C-WET list of manufacturers. Besides, banks have verified before releasing loans for purchase of wind mills whether the petitioner is listed by C-WET. Further, the nodal agency like Electricity Boards often insist upon that the equipment is supplied by manufacturers listed by C-WET. Customs Department would grant duty concession for import of certain components only if C-WET lists the manufacturer and therefore, since the petitioner is not included in the manufacturing list, gravest prejudice is caused to the petitioner and the action of the respondent is arbitrary and violative of Article 14 and it affects the livelihood of more than 300 workers and three times their numbers, who work through such sub-contracts and therefore, the impugned order of the respondent has to be quashed.

18. I have given due consideration to the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side and also the rules position and decisions relied on by them besides perusing all the material documents filed in support of the respective parties.

19. It is seen that the petitioner is a company engaged in the manufacture of wind energy equipments popularly known as Wind Mills and it has a factory at Pondicherry. Its activities include manufacture, erection and commission and later maintenance of such wind mills or power generators. It has got ISO 9001:2 certificate which is renewed from time to time. It had a sister concern called "Arul Mariamman Textiles Ltd., Wind Energy Textiles Ltd. (AMTL)" which was importing complete equipment for a wind mill from Wind Mill, a Denmark company. The equipments were imported on "knocked down condition" basis and the petitioner has experience in the field. Due to the bankruptcy of Wind World, Denmark, its equipments were auctioned by the liquidator in Denmark and the petitioner took large amount of such components in the auction and imported them to India and the same have been used in the manufacture of Wind Mill. Besides these components, the petitioner has also developed sources for getting components in India itself. One of the components of the wind turbines is gear box. The petitioner company was sourcing gear box from one Shanthi Gears, one of the manufacturers of gear boxes of various types which is also an ISO certified company and a leading exporter of gear box to foreign countries including Germany. Further, the respondent has consistently published a list of manufacturers of Wind Energy generators/Wind Turbines in which the petitioner has been included as one of the manufacturers of Wind Energy generators/Wind Turbine manufacturers in India under the category of 250 KW manufacturers. The respondent is the authority to issue type certificate of wind turbines of 250KW. After the evaluation of performance, the provisional type certificate has been issued to the petitioner valid from 29.12.2005 to 30.09.2006 and accordingly, the petitioner's name has been included in the list for the above period. In the conformity evaluation certificate in C. No.PTC I-010 dated 04.01.2006, it is stated that the conformity evaluation was carried out according to TAPS 2000 Provisional Type Certification Scheme for wind turbines in India. The wind turbine type is specified in page 2 of this certificate. Changes in the wind turbine design or the manufacturer's quality system are to be approved by the respondent. If any changes are carried out without approval, the Certificate loses its validity. This certificate has been in existence. So long as the change in the wind turbine design or manufacturer's quality system and if there is a change or deviation, then it has to be carried out with the approval of the respondent.