Judgment :- Heard Mr. Mohana Sundararajan, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners. 2. Both the writ petitions have been filed challenging the communication, dated 20.4.1999, issued by the third respondent relating to the representations, dated 23. 1999 and 23. 1999, sent by the petitioners regarding the embargo on 1998 quotas in CAT. EU 26. 3. On a reading of the impugned communication, it is seen that the request of the petitioners have been recommended to the Government of India. However, the recommendation has not been accepted by the Government of India. 4. Thus, it is clear that the impugned communication, cannot be subjected to challenge as no decision has been arrived at or recorded therein. Further, no adverse orders have been passed against the petitioners by the impugned communication, dated 20.4.1999, issued by the third respondent. 5. At this stage of the hearing of the writ petition, the learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners may be permitted to make appropriate representations to the first respondent, namely, the Secretary to Government, Union of India, Ministry of Textiles, New Delhi, seeking the necessary reliefs. 6. On such submission being made, it is made clear that it is open to the petitioners to make the necessary representations to the concerned authorities seeking the reliefs as found necessary by the petitioners. In such circumstances, the writ petitions stand dismissed with the above observations. No costs.