SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1983 Supreme(SC) 186

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
S. MURTAZA FAZAL ALI AND A. VARADARAJAN, JJ.
M/s. Oswal Woolen Mills Ltd. and another, Appellants
Versus
Union of India and others, Respondents.
Civil Appeal No. 591 and Writ Petn. No. 802 of 1982
D/-11-7-1983.
Advocates appeared
Mr. Soil J. Sorabjee, Sr. Advocate and Mr. Rajiv Dutta, Advocate with him for Appellant; Mr. M. M. Adbul Khader, Sr. Advocate, Mr. Girish Chandra and Miss A. Subhashini, Advocates with him for Respondent ; Mr. V. M. Tarkunde, Sr, Advocate, Mr. Rajiv Dutta, Advocate with him for Petitioner in Writ Petn. No. 802 of 1982

Advocates:
A.SUBASHINI, GIRISH CHANDRA, M.M.ABDUL KHADER, Rajiv Datta, RAJIV DUTTA, SOLI J.SORABJI, V.M.TARKUNDE

Headnote:

Constitution of India, 1950 - Article 32 - Import Policy - Import replenishment (REP) Licence - Special leave petition - Appellants have filed Writ Petition No. 802 of 1982 under Article 32 of Constitution against same three respondents and for same reliefs prayed for in Civil Appeal viz. (1) quashing Circular dated issued by Joint Chief Controller of Imports and Exports as being ultra vires and null and void - Directing withdrawal of order dated of third respondent, Deputy Chief Controller of Imports and Exports, Amritsar, refusing to make endorsement on (REP) Licence - Issuing a direction to respondents 2 and 3 to make endorsement contemplated in paragraph 139 of Import Policy, on (REP) Licence and (4) restraining respondents 2 and 3 from implementing Circular dated and order dated - First petitioner M/s. Oswal Woollen Mills Ltd., Ludhiana was originally a registered Export House within meaning of paragraph 5 (7) of Import Policy and has been a manufacturer-exporter since and is now also a recognised Trading House as first petitioners Export House Certificate has been converted into a Trading House Certificate in terms of paragraph 195 (1) of Import Policy – Held, learned Judges have stated in their judgment that Circular dated appears to change Import Policy and that contention of petitioners before them that condition mentioned in impugned order dated is not found in paragraph 138 of Import Policy is not acceptable to them - Learned Judges were right in saying that Circular appears to change Import Policy but they have erred in saying that condition mentioned in impugned order dated is found in paragraph 138(1) of Import Policy, 1981-82, Court are unable to find any such condition in paragraph 138(l) of Import Policy - It is significant to note that paragraph 138(1) was not mentioned in paragraph 140 of Import Policy - In view of respondents contention that Circular dated is only clarificatory of paragraph 138(1) of Import Policy and does not amend or modify that paragraph it is unnecessary for Court to go into question whether Circular issued by Joint Chief Controller of Imports and Exports can validly amend Import Policy - On a perusal of relevant paragraphs of Imports Policy, mentioned above Court agree with Mr. Soli J. Sorabjee, Senior Advocate for appellants that condition mentioned in third respondents impugned letter dated is not there in paragraph 138(1) of Import Policy, and that Circular dated is invalid and that rejection of petitioners request made in letter dated by third respondent in letter dated is unwarranted, and request should have been complied with - Petition allowed.

Judgment

VARADARAJAN, J. :- This appeal by special leave is directed against the judgment of a Division Bench of Delhi High Court dismissing the Civil Writ Petition No. 2581 of 1981 in limine, with the observation that the Circular dated 31-8-1981 issued by the second respondent, the Joint Chief Controller of Imports and Exports, New Delhi appears to change the Import Policy, that the contention that the condition mentioned in the order impugned in the Writ Petition is not found in paragraph 138 of the Import Policy for 1981-82 is not acceptable, that a reading of paragraph 138(1) of the Import Policy shows that the Import replenishment (REP) Licence, if transferable and an endorsement is sought thereon, must be with regard to the materials mentioned in the (REP) Licence and not any other material and that the contention of the first respondent, the Union of India that the endorsement could only be against the export by the applicant himself is correct.

2. The appellants have filed the Writ Petition No. 802 of 1982 under Article 32 of the Constitution against the same three respondents and for the same reliefs prayed for in the Civil Appeal viz. (1) quashing the Circular dated 31-8-1981 issued by the Joint Chief Controller of Imports and Exports, New Delhi as being ultra vires and null and void, (2) directing withdrawal of the order dated 7-12-1981 of the third respondent, the Deputy Chief Controller of Imports and Exports, Amritsar, refusing to make the endorsement on the (REP) Licence, (3) issuing a direction to respondents 2 and 3 to make the endorsement contemplated in paragraph 139 of the Import Policy, 1981-82 on the (REP) Licence and (4) restraining respondents 2 and 3 from implementing the Circular dated 31-8-81 and the order dated 7-12-198l.

3. The parties will be referred to in the Civil Appeal as arrayed in the writ petition before the High Court for the sake of convenience.

4. No copy of the writ petition filed before the High Court has been produced in this Appeal. The case of the petitioners as set out in the special leave petition is this. The first petitioner M/s. Oswal Woollen Mills Ltd., Ludhiana was originally a registered Export House within the meaning of paragraph 5 (7) of the Import Policy, 1981-82, and has, been a manufacturer-exporter since 1971 and is now also a recognised Trading House as the first petitioners Export House Certificate has been converted into a Trading House Certificate in terms of paragraph 195 (1) of the Import Policy, 1981-82. Recognised trading houses are entitled to certain facilities under paragraph 195 (4) of the Import Policy, 1981-82 and one of them mentioned in paragraph 195 (4) (ii) is import replenishment (REP) Licences transferred to them by others. Paragraph 195 (4) (ii) reads as under :

"Trading Houses will be granted the following facilities under the Import Policy:- Import replenishment (REP) Licences transferred to them by others."

5. For obtaining the said facility the first petitioner acquired by transfer the Replenishment (REP) Licence, viz. "Import Licence No. PW/2941/669/C/XX/78/Z/ 80 dated 27th February, 1981 for total value of Rs. 2,02,781" from the licence holder who was himself a manufacturer-exporter under a transfer letter dated 8-7-1981 and sent it to the third respondent for the purpose of obtaining endorsement thereon. Paragraph 140 of the Import Policy, 1981-82 provides for transfer of (REP) Licences and reads as under :

"The REP Licence will be issued in the name of a Registered Exporter only and will not be subject to Actual User condition. Except for cases covered by paragraphs 136(2), 185(2) and 186(1), a licence holder may transfer the licence in full or in part in favour of any other person. The licence holder or such transferer may import the goods permitted therein but the facility of paragraphs 136(2), 137 and 146 shall not be available to any transferee unless the transferee is himself a. Registered Exporter and can satisfy the Custom Authorities at















Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

SupremeToday

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top