( 1 ) THE petitioners being garment exporter and an association of garment exporters respectively are aggrieved by the quota policy instruction and circular imposing conditions for transfer of quota under the garment Export Quota Policy.

"the EXIM Policy covers the issue of exports and specifically for garment export Garment Export entitlement Policy (GEEP) is formulated. The Policy is stated to derive its legislative sanction from the foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Act, 1992 ( hereinafter to be referred to as, the said Act ). A notification was issued dated 12. 11. 1999 bringing into force the GEEP for 2000-2004 and the entitlements were permitted to be transferred, which were valid till 30th september of the year and could be extended till 31st december on payment of Bank Guarantee (BG) / Earnest money Deposit (EMD) at specified rates. There are various categories of quotas including Past Performance entitlement (PPE), Non-Quota Export Entitlement (NQE) and first Cum First Serve Entitlement (FCFS ). In respect of ppe category, allotment till 31st May was transferable; while in case of allotment valid till 30th September, transfer was allowed till 20th September. In case of nqe, transferability norms of PPE category were to apply and these norms are stated to have been followed for the year 2000-2003. The grievance of the petitioners is the modification in this Policy for transfer of entitlements in quotas for category 340/640, 347/348 in USA, Group-II of EU categories 4, 6, 7 and 26 and Canada Category-5 leaving all other categories for transfer as it is, whereby the entire quota in these categories was prevented from transfer. The petitioners claim to have got information in this behalf in view of the message dated 05. 07. 2004 for release of quotas under FCFS system instead of the usual transfer. The sole contention advanced by learned senior counsel for the petitioners is that such quota is a license to export and when the quota is granted, vested rights accrue which cannot be defeated by amendment of the policy. The contention, thus, advanced is that the policy can be amended prospectively, but the bar for transfer created amounts to a retrospective amendment of the Policy. This contention is sought to be substantiated by reference to provisions of the said Act, as the submission is that Section 5 authorises the central Government to formulate and announce the Export and Import Policy and the right to amend the Policy. It is, thus, submitted that the parent Act itself does not permit any retrospective change in the Policy and the exim Policy being at best in the nature of a subordinate legislation cannot be retrospectively made applicable unless authorized by the parent Statute. 5. Respondent No. 2, Apparel Export Promotion Council (AEPC) distributes the quota in terms of the policy of union of India, respondent No. 1. A circular dated 05. 07. 2004 was issued in respect of the subject matter and the relevant extract of the same dealing with the matter in issue is as under:"

( 2 ) AS you are aware, the Quota Policy allows limited flexibility of transfer of quotas under PPE/nqe systems till 20th September. This flexibility is not available to the other systems viz. NIE/fcfs systems.

( 3 ) IN this context, it has been noticed that during the current year, the actual utilization of quotas in most of traditionally fast moving categories has been low, though quantities have been allocated far in excess of the annual quota limits imposed by the restraining countries. This gives rise to a nagging suspicion that certain vested interests are including in increased activity of speculation and hoarding of quotas thereby creating artificial scarcity especially in categories where there has traditionally been a good demand. According to the trade circles, lately there is a spurt in premium for these categories in the market, which if allowed unchecked would affect the genuine exports of the country.