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

2024 Supreme(Kar) 7

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
M. NAGAPRASANNA, J.
All India Hdpe/Pp Woven Fabric Manufacturers’ Association – Appellant
Versus
The Secretary Government Of India Competition Commission Of India – Respondent
Writ Petition No.287 of 2024 (GM – RES)
Decided on : 08-01-2024

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :SRI N.RAGHAVENDRA RAO, ADVOCATE
For the Respondent: SRI H.SHANTHI BHUSHAN, DSGI A/W SMT.SADHANA DESAI, CGC

The main legal point established in the judgment is the importance of quality control in plastic manufacturing for public health and safety standards.

Headnote:

Notification - Quality Control on Import of Plastic - Bureau of Indian Standards Act, 2016 - [Polyethylene Material for Moulding and Extrusion (Quality Control) Order, 2021, Polyethylene Material for Moulding and Extrusion (Quality Control) Order, 2022, Polyethylene Material for Moulding and Extrusion (Quality Control) Order, 2023] - The court discussed the imposition of quality control on import of plastic under the Bureau of Indian Standards Act, 2016 and rejected the petition, emphasizing the importance of quality control in plastic manufacturing for public health and safety standards.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner, an Association of Manufacturers and suppliers of plastic products, challenged a Notification issued by the Government of India imposing quality control on import of plastic into the nation. The petitioner claimed that the quality control order would restrict free movement and sale of raw materials and create a monopoly in the industry.

Finding of the Court:

The court rejected the petition, emphasizing the importance of quality control in plastic manufacturing for public health and safety standards. It held that the quality control orders were necessary to ensure the final plastic products meet certain standards of quality and would not become hazardous to the environment.

Issues: The issues involved the imposition of quality control on import of plastic, the alleged monopoly in the industry, and the impact on the petitioner's business.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the quality control orders were necessary to ensure the final plastic products meet certain standards of quality and would not become hazardous to the environment. It emphasized the importance of quality control in plastic manufacturing for public health and safety standards.

Final Decision: The court rejected the petition, finding no merit in the petitioner's claims.

ORDER :

The petitioner is before this Court calling in question a Notification dated 15-04-2021 issued by Government of India which imposes quality control on import of plastic into the shores of the nation to become effective from 05-01-2024.

2. Shorn of unnecessary details, facts in brief, are as follows:-

The petitioner is said to be an Association of Manufacturers and suppliers of high density polyethylene, low density polyethylene and other allied products. It is the case of the petitioner/Association that high density polyethylene is a plastic polymer which is commonly used by variety of consumers including industrial units. It is more resistant to cracking and less likely to suffer from stress induced failure. The low density polyethylene is widely used in packaging like foils, trays and plastic bags for both food and nonfood purposes. The petitioner and its members were importing raw material required for manufacture and supply of high density polyethylene and low density polyethylene products and after such import were supplying finished goods all over the country not restricted to domestic consumption but were also exporting and claims to be contributing to the economy of the country. It is the averment that the industries coming under the Association are feeding over 25 lakh families as they have employed that many persons in their respective industries.

3. The third respondent/Department of Chemicals and Petro Chemicals of the Union of India issues a quality control order on 15-04-2021 seeking to impose certain restrictions on low density polyethylene, linear low density polyethylene and high density polyethylene. The quality control was that the aforesaid polyethylenes should confirm to the corresponding Indian standard and shall bear the standard mark under a licence from the Bureau of Indian Standards (‘BIS’ for short) as per Schedule I and Schedule-II of the Bureau of Indian Standards (Conformity Assessment) Regulations, 2018. The petitioner claims that imposition of such a clause on the supply of raw material will restrict free movement and sale of the said raw materials and would create a monopoly in the hands of a few in the industry. It is, therefore, the Association submitted certain representations to respondents 2 and 3 to have a look at the conditions imposed in the quality control order insofar as it necessitates the quality to pass through the BIS with the seal of BIS. That is not acceded to. On 26-09-2023 the 3rd respondent issues another notification directing that the earlier notification which imposed quality standard would be coming into effect on 05-01-2024. It is, therefore, the petitioner claiming to be aggrieved by the imposition of conditions for import of plastic is before this Court in the subject petition.

4. Heard Sri N.Raghavendra Rao, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri H. Shanthi Bhushan, learned Deputy Solicitor General of India appearing for the respondents.

5. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would vehemently contend that the notification is aimed at one single purpose, to help Reliance Industries, as according to the petitioner Reliance Industries has a monopoly in the manufacture of linear and a particular ingredient ‘granule’ that is necessary for production of plastic. It is his contention that there is no other player in the market and all the plastic manufacturers have to line up to Reliance Industries only. The learned counsel would further contend that there is no nexus with the production of plastic, for imposition of the aforesaid conditions, he would contend such conditions are imposed on raw material. But, such conditions ought to have been imposed on a finished product and not on raw material. It is his submission that if on finished product quali

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