1. The captioned writ petitions lay challenge to notice of initiation of safeguard investigation dated 16.01.2009 issued under Rule 6 of the Customs Tariff (Transitional Product Specific Safeguard Duty) Rules, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as „Rules?), the notification of preliminary findings dated 30.01.2009 issued by the Director General (Safeguards)(hereinafter referred to as „the Director General?), and the consequent notification bearing No.37/2009-Customs dated 20.04.2009 issued by the Government of India, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue imposing a provisional safeguard duty at the rate of 20 per cent ad valorem in respect to soda ash falling under sub-heading 283620 of the first schedule to the Act on its import into India from People?s Republic of China (in short „China?).

2. Petitioner No.1 in Writ Petition No. 8749/2009 is a company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as „Saint-Gobain?). The said petitioner is in the business of manufacturing and marketing Architectural and Automotive Glass. Petitioner No.2 in the said writ petition is an association of float glass manufacturers. The Petitioner in Writ Petition No.8761/2009 is the Federation of glass manufacturers which is incorporated as a non-profit company under the Companies Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as „the Federation?). The Federation claims to represent all segments of the industry which includes large, medium and small scale manufacturers located in different parts of the country.

3. The genesis of the present litigation is in the initiation of safeguard investigation by the Director General under the provision of Rule 6 read with Section 8C of the Customs Tariff Tax, 1975 (hereinafter referred to as „the Act?). It transpires that on 01.01.2009; the Alkali Manufacturers Association of India, i.e., Respondent No.3, which comprises of domestic producers such as Gujarat heavy Chemical Limited, Tata Chemicals Limited, Saurashtra Chemicals Limited, DCW Ltd and Nirma Ltd, (hereinafter collectively referred to„domestic producers?) filed an application with the Director General for the purposes of seeking initiation of investigation to determine existence of serious injury or threat of serious injury to the domestic producers of soda ash on account of import of increased quantities of soda ash from China which had the potentiality of market disruption or threatened to cause a market disruption both in absolute and relative terms when compared to the domestic production of soda ash. By the said application, the domestic producers sought protection by seeking an imposition of both safeguard duty as well as quantitative restrictions with regard to import of soda ash originating from China for a period of four years. In the application, a prayer was also made that, in the interregnum, a provisional duty be imposed in view of the presence of „critical circumstances? which, according to them, would result in irreparable damage. The said application was followed by an updated application which was filed with the Director General on 14.01.2009. 4. On receipt of the aforesaid written application of the domestic producers, the Director General issued the impugned notice of initiation of safeguards investigation dated 16.01.2009; a copy of which, as mandated under Rule 5, was sent to all interested parties calling upon them to respond by 16.02.2009. By the said initiation notice, it was also made clear that any other party to the investigation who wishes to be considered as an interested party was free to submit its request to the Director General within 21 days of the said notice.

4.1 It is not disputed that Saint-Gobain received a copy of the initiation notice, even though the date of receipt is not indicated in the writ petition. What is, however, not in dispute is that, by a communication dated 29.01.2009, Saint-Gobain requested the Director General to supply to it, a copy of the initiation notification,