The government is not estopped from varying or modifying even a general order passed under Section 25(1) of the Customs Act, and there is no inherent right of an applicant to claim that an exemption once given under Section 25(1) should continue for any particular period of time.

( 1 ) THE lure of imported items in this country continues to have a great attraction even after 35 years of independence Apparently that seems the reason why the Government has had to come out with the liberal stand making it easy to import items from outside not necessarily because they cannot be manufactured but because they are more easily available outside. In 1978 exemption from payment of custom duty to the extent of 50% was permitted on cars fitted with special system for handicapped persons. In may 1978, however, the policy was reviewed and it was found that the cars could easily be restored for use of normal persons and hence it was decided not to grant exemption from custom duty on such cars. However, once the attraction of imported items had been introduced in the market it is not easy to get rid of it. So the Government was naturally pestered with restoring the concession and using 1981 as the year of handicapped a policy was brought forth which provided that cars imported for disabled persons would be charged to a total custom duty of 50% ad valorem, as against the prevalent rate of 185% ad valorem subject to the condition that the engine capacity of the cars did not exceed 1000 cc/10 H. P. There were certain other conditions attached to it which were not relevant to be mentioned here. This policy was again reviewed and a press note was issued on 20. 7. 1982. More or less the condition imposed earlier continued excepting that the CIF value of the car could not exceed Rs. 65,000. 00 and the capacity limit of 10 H. P. was removed. The petitioners who are described as disabled persons are the ones who have filed these writ petitions, mainly on the ground that they applied in pursuance of this policy of July 1982 for the grant of exemption from payment of custom duty but have not been so given. Their grievance further is that a large number of similar situated persons have been given the exemption u/s 25 (2) of the Customs Act and for no reason the same benefit is being denied to them. The policy prior to 5. 4. 1982 was that an applicant had to first get a custom clearance from the department of revenue and then apply for the import licence from the Chief Controller of Imports and Exports. By notification of 5. 4. 1982 the Central Govt. gave general permission to import into India motor cars by disabled persons subject to that the motor cars to be imported shall be adopted for use by disabled person concerned and that the said persons are granted custom duty relief by the Deptt. of Revenue, Min. of Finance. For the purpose of considering these applications an inter-ministerial committee was appointed. To complete the version it appears that a further notifications has been issued on 25. 2. 1982 whereby exemption has been given as is in excess of amount calculated at the rate of 50% ad valorem duty for import by a disabled person subject to certain conditions laid down therein. It is Common case that the conditions for satisfying about the disability test laid down in the earlier policy which was prevalent in July 1982 was different from that which is now laid down in the conditions imposed on 25. 5. 1983. Whether the earlier conditions were less rigorous as counsel for the respondent says or were, in fact, very praticable as the counsel for the petitioner says is unnecessary to decide for the present case. Petitioners case is that they fulful all the conditions imposed in July 1982 policy and it is in pursuance of this that they applied for exemption from custom duty. And because they have been denied it, the petitioners had to file the writ petition, the first being filed in June 1982. Unfortunately, by then 25. 5. 1983 notification had been issued and the respondent naturally very conveniently took the stand that as the petitioners do not fulfil the criteria and conditions laid down in 25th May 1983 notification the exemption could not be issued to them. It is this stand which the petitioners are challe