Back
2002 Supreme(Del) 1412
High Court Of Delhi
M.K.JAIN - Appellant
Versus
UNION OF INDIA - Respondent
Civil 5416 of 2002
Decided On : 09/16/2002
G.L.RAVAL, Jyoti Singh, K.K.Sud, KULJIT RAVAL, RANI JETHMALANI, SANJIV BEHL
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the impugned actions related to the garment export entitlement policy were taken in public interest to regulate high premiums and ensure availability of quotas to exporters.
Headnote:
EXPORT POLICY - GARMENT EXPORT ENTITLEMENT POLICY - Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Act, 1992 - Sections 3, 5 - The court discussed the impugned notices and decisions related to the garment export entitlement policy and the Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Act, 1992. It highlighted the key legal provisions and their interpretations, including the requirement of gazette notification for amendments to the import and export policy, and the authority to make amendments to the garment policy through public notice. The court found that the impugned actions were taken in public interest to regulate high premiums and ensure availability of quotas to exporters, and therefore, dismissed the writ petition.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners, exporters engaged in the manufacture and export of garments, sought quashing of impugned notices and decisions related to the garment export entitlement policy. They alleged that the notices imposed unreasonable restrictions, infringed on their right to carry on business, and were issued without authority of law. The petitioners also claimed that the impugned notices were mala fide and intended to create panic in the market.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the impugned actions were taken in public interest to regulate high premiums and ensure availability of quotas to exporters. It held that the decisions were justified under the garment policy and were not against public interest. The court dismissed the writ petition.
Issues: The issues included the validity of the impugned notices and decisions, the requirement of gazette notification for amendments to the import and export policy, and the authority to make amendments to the garment policy through public notice.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the impugned actions were taken in public interest to regulate high premiums and ensure availability of quotas to exporters. It found that the decisions were justified under the garment policy and were not against public interest.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the writ petition with no order as to costs.
( 1 ) ARGUMENTS in the writ petition were concluded on 10. 9. 2002 and judgment was reserved. In view of urgency in the matter, operative portion of the judgment/order was announced on 13. 9. 2002. The facts and reasons for the judgment are as follows:
( 2 ) PETITIONERS are exporters, registered with respondent No. 2, M/s. Apparel Export Promotion council, (in short "aepc") and are engaged in the manufacture and export of garments and claim to have turnover of Rs. 300 crores. Petitioners are aggrieved by the notice dated 20. 8. 2002, notifying that the Government vide its letter No. 1/1/2002-Exports-l dated 19. 8. 2002, has decided that respondent No. 2/aepc may immediately release 10 per cent additional quantities in the categories 338/339-USA under the FCFS, i. e. first cum first served quota, after giving usual notice to the trade. Further, it was notified that transfers of quota in the above categories would be permitted only up to 30. 8. 2002. The said notice is Annexure-D to the petition. This was followed by policy instruction dated 21. 8. 2002, Annexure-E, notifying that the request for transfer under categories 338/339-USA would be accepted only up to 29. 8. 2002, 30. 8. 2002 being a holiday.
( 3 ) PETITIONERS by the writ petition, seek quashing of the impugned letter No. 1/1/2002- exports-l dated 19. 8. 2002; issued by respondent No. 1 and notice dated 20. 8. 2002. Petitioners also impugn the policy instructions No. 02/14 dated 21. 8. 2002, issued by respondent No. 2, by which the last date of transfer of quotas was further preponed from 30. 8. 2002 to 29. 8. 2002 in view of 30. 8. 2002 being a holiday. Petitioners seek a writ of prohibition, prohibiting respondents to give effect to the aforesaid communications and policy instructions. Petitioners also seek a mandamus to the respondent to ensure that petitioners would be not face any embargo for their quota certificates and the same would remain valid and usable.
( 4 ) THE writ petition had come up before the Court on 28. 8. 2002, when notice to show cause was directed to be issued for 3. 9. 2002, and the impugned notices and decisions were made subject to the outcome of writ petition. Another CM. 9295/2002, was moved by the petitioner, wherein petitioners contended that certain vital aspects could not be urged by them on 28. 8. 2002, relating to international fairs, which were currently in the offing. It was urged that petitioners and others had scheduled their purchases of quotas and negotiations for obtaining export orders based on the transfer of quotas being allowed till 20. 9. 2002. This was sought to be changed suddenly by preponing the date from 20. 9. 2002 to 29/30. 8. 2002. An interim order directing that the decision preponing the last date of transfer of quota to 30. 8. 2002 was stayed till the next date i. e. 3. 9. 2002.
( 5 ) LEARNED counsel for. the petitioner, Ms. Rani Jethmalani as well as Mr. K. K. Sud, additional Solicitor General with Ms. Jyoti Singh, counsel for Union of India and Mr. G. L. Rawal and Mr. Kuljeet Rawal, counsel for respondent No. 2/aepc have been heard. Arguments were concluded on 10. 9. 2002, when judgment was reserved. Written synopsis have also been filed by the parties.
( 6 ) PETITIONERS case, as made out during the submission by Ms. Rani Jethmalani is as follows:-
(I) Respondent No. 2/aepc under the directions of the Ministry of Textiles, comes out with Garments Export Entitlement Policy, which is effective for every 3 to 4 years. The Garments Export Entitlement Policy is formulated, keeping in mind international business quota restriction imposed by different countries and the requirements of the exporters of garments. As per the policy, Indian exporters are allotted quotas under different regimes viz. Past Performance Entitlement (PPE), new Investment Entitlement (NIE), Non-quota Exporters Entitlement (NOEE) and first Cum First Served Entitlement (FCFS ). The aforesaid export entitlements are allowed to export
