2011 Supreme(Del) 179
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR
GUJARAT AMBUJA EXPORTS LTD AND ORS –Petitioners
versus
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS –Respondents
W.P.(C) 8590/2010 & CM No.21907/2010
W.P.(C) 8408/2010 & CM No.21559/2010
W.P.(C) 8627/2010 & CM No.21962/2010
W.P.(C) 8548/2010 & CM No.21665/2010
W.P.(C) 8407/2010 & CM No. 21558/2010
W.P.(C) 8406/2010 & CM No. 21556/2010
Decided on : 17th February 2011
Mr. P.H. Parekh, Senior Advocate with Mr. E.R. Kumar, Mr. Sameer Parekh, Ms. Pallavi Sharma and Ms. Retika, Advocates
Mr. A.S. Chandhiok, Additional Solicitor General of India with Mr. Sachin Datta, CGSC with Mr. Manikya Khanna, Advocate.
Headnote:A) Foreign Trade (Development & Regulation) Act, 1992, Section 3(2)- Obtaining Export Authorization Registration Certificate (`EARC?) 45days prior to shipment made mandatory - Imposing the over all limit of EARC to 720 million kgs on cotton yard is not the ultra vires the Act or violation of the fundamental rights under Article 19(1)(g) - The absolute restriction on the export of cotton yarn also cannot be subjected to judicial review as it is economic policy and in matters of economic policy, the courts cannot intervene and substitute its own views to that of the Government. It was held that the Notifications are bad only because it imposes retrospective ban on the export of cotton yarn is also rejected because the industry was well aware of the impending ban on the export of cotton yarn. Similarly Theban on export of cotton yarn was held to be a reasonable restriction because it was imposed keeping in view of the domestic market and requirement of cotton industry.
1. The challenge in this batch of writ petitions by manufacturers of cotton yarn is to a ban on the export of cotton yarn with effect from 1st December 2010, first brought about by a Press Release of the Ministry of Textiles (MoT) of that date and later by a Notification dated 22nd December 2010 issued by the Department of Commerce (`DoC?) in the Ministry of Commerce and Industries (`MoCI?), Government of India. The Petitioners challenge the validity of the aforementioned Press Release and Notification as being ultra vires of the Foreign Trade (Development & Regulation) Act, 1992 [`FTDR Act?] and violative of the fundamental rights under Articles 14 and 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India.
2. At the outset, it must be noted that the facts in five of the six writ petitions are more or less similar. For the sake of convenience, the facts in the first petition i.e., W.P. (C) 8406 of 2010 by Gujarat Ambuja Exports Ltd. (`GAEL?) are set out in detail. The facts in W.P. (C) 8548 of 2010 by Krishna Knitwear Technology Ltd. (`KKTL?) are somewhat different as it is a 100% export-oriented unit (`EOU?). The facts concerning KKTL will be discussed separately. Relevant provisions of the Foreign Trade Policy 2009-2014
3. The Foreign Trade Policy (`FTP?) for the period 27th August 2009 to 31st March 2014 was published in the Official Gazette on 27th August 2009. The FTP states that by 2014 India?s export of goods and services is expected to be doubled. India?s share in the global trade is expected to be doubled by 2020. Prior to the ban on their export, cotton yarn and raw cotton were freely exportable commodities. Para 2.1 of the FTP reads as under:
“2.1 Exports and Imports shall be free, except where regulated by FTP or any other law in force. The item wise export and import policy shall be, as specified in ITC (HS) notified by DGFT, as amended from time to time.”
4. Para 1.5 of the FTP envisages certain transitional arrangements when there is a restriction on exports or imports of commodities. Para 1.5 reads as under:
“1.5 In case an export of import that is permitted freely under FTP is subsequently subjected to any restriction or regulation, such export or import will ordinarily be permitted notwithstanding such restriction or regulation, unless otherwise stipulated, provided that shipment of export of import is made within original validity with respect to available balance and time period of an irrevocable commercial letter of credit, established before date of imposition of such restriction. However, for operationalizing such irrevocable commercial letter of credit an applicant shall have to register the Letter of Credit and contract with the concerned RA within 15 days of the issue of any such restriction or regulation.”
5. Para 9.12 of the Handbook of Procedures which inter alia supplements the FTP reads as under: “However, wherever the Policy provisions have been modified to the disadvantage of the exporters, the same shall not be applicable to the consignments already handed over to the Customs for examination and subsequent exports up to the date of the Public Notice. Similarly, in such cases where the goods are handed over to the customs authorities before the expiry of the export obligation period but actual Exports take place after expiry of the export obligation period, such exports shall be considered within the export obligation period and taken towards fulfillment of export obligation.”
6. In terms of the powers conferred by Section 5 of the FTDR Act read with Para 1.3 and 2.1 of the FTP 2009-14, the central government made the following amendments in Schedule 2, Table B of ITC HS Classifications of Export-Import Items by inserting Serial No. 161 (B), in Chapter 52 by a Notification dated 9th April 2010. The relevant portion of the said notification showing the inserted entry reads as under:
S. No. Tariff Item Code Unit Item of Description Export Policy Nature of Restriction
161B 5205 Cotton yarn (other