The central legal point established in the judgment is that the conditions for issuing an export license should be based on the policy in force at the time of the export application and cannot be retrospectively imposed.

Headnote:
Export Licence - Sandalwood Oil - Entry 43 of Appendix XLIII-I of Handbook of Procedures - Summary of Acts and Sections: The court discussed the policy of Export and Import, particularly the conditions for exporting sandalwood oil as per the public notices and export instructions issued by the Director General of Foreign Trade. The key legal provisions interpreted were the conditions for export as per Entry 43 of Appendix XLIII-I of Handbook of Procedures, Vol.I, 1992-97, and the retrospective effect of the conditions imposed by the Director General of Foreign Trade. The court emphasized that the conditions in existence at the time of the export application were the only ones to be considered for issuing the export license.
Fact of the Case:

The respondent, an exporter, applied for a license to export sandalwood oil, which was subject to certain conditions under the export policy. The Director General of Foreign Trade refused to issue the license, citing additional conditions imposed retrospectively. The respondent challenged this action in court.
Finding of the Court:

The court found that the conditions imposed by the Director General of Foreign Trade, which were not in existence at the time of the export application, could not be applied retrospectively. Therefore, the respondent was entitled to an export license as per the conditions in force at the time of the application.
Issues: The main issue was the retrospective application of additional conditions for exporting sandalwood oil by the Director General of Foreign Trade.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that only the conditions in existence at the time of the export application were relevant for issuing the export license, and the retrospective imposition of additional conditions was not valid.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the appeal and directed the Director General of Foreign Trade to issue an export license to the respondent in accordance with the conditions in force at the time of the application.

Judgment :-

Srikrishna, C. J.

The appellant in this case challenges the order of the learned Single Judge dated 2nd December 1999 rendered in O. P. No. 21419 of 1997.

2. The respondent is an exporter who exports several articles including sandal wood oil. Under the policy of Export and Import as it stood at the material time, the respondent applied on 16-4-1996 for a licence to export sandal wood oil. Sandal wood oil was in the negative list of prohibited items in the import-export policy document till export thereof was permitted subject to certain conditions under the changed policy as declared in the public Notice No.75 dated 8-12-1995 as amended by Public Notice No.77/Exp (PN) 92-97 dated 1-1-1996 issued by the Director General of Foreign Trade. By this notification, previous public notice dated 31st March, 1993 appearing at Appendix XLIII-I of Handbook of Procedures, Vol.I, 1992-97(Revised Edition: May, 1995) was amended by the addition of serial No.43. Serial No.43 reads as under:

" 43.Sandalwood Oil; Export allowed subject to:

(i) Certificate of Origin from the Principal/Chief Conservative of Forests of the State concerned;

(ii) No objection certificate from the Ministry of Environment & Forests, Government of India;

(iii) Any other condition, including a ceiling, that may be imposed by the Director General of Foreign Trade."

The sum and substance of this amendment was that export of sandalwood oil become permissible subject to the restrictions imposed in this policy declaration. The Conditions (i) and (ii) need not detain us. Condition No. (iii) merely empowers the Director General of foreign Trade to impose any other condition including a ceiling on the export of Sandalwood oil. In exercise of this power, the Director General of Foreign Trade issued an export instruction notice dated17th July, 1996 (Ext.P26) in which another condition, inter alia, was imposed vide para4. That condition reads as under:

"Only the Sandalwood Oil distilled from two classes of Sandalwood viz. Sandalwood root class and Ainchilta class procured directly from the State Forest Department shall be permitted for exports."

3. The respondent had purchased sandalwood oil from a party who had participated in an auction conducted by the Government. That party has applied to the Government to take steps to give a certificate to that effect. Ext.P9 produced in O.P. No/ 21419 of 1997 issued by the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests (General), Government of Kerala shows that quantities mentioned in the certificate were purchased and cleared by the petitioner from the parties whose names were also specified and who had directly participated in the auction. This certificate, therefore, indicate the origin of the material beyond dispute. Though the petitioner had applied for export licence in April 1996, the Director General of Foreign Trade (DGFT) did not promptly issue the licence. The petitioner, therefore, sent two reminders dated 1st August 1996 and 23rd January 1997 requesting the DGFT for expediting the issue of export the issue of export licence. By an order made on 10th November, 1997 the DGFT refused to issue export licence on the ground that the respondent had neither participated in the Government auctions, nor manufactured the oil, but had purchased the same from private distilleries. The respondent was informed that, as per the policy of the Government relating to sandalwood oil, only sandalwood oil distilled from two classes of sandalwood, i.e. Sandalwood root class and Ainchilta class procured directly from the State Forest Department was permitted for export. Since the respondent had not done so, the request was rejected.

4. Respondent filed this original petition to challenge this action of the Director General of Foreign Trade refusing permission to export sandalwood oil. The learned Single Judge by his judgment dated 2nd December, 1999 has taken the view that the certificates issued by the Principle Chief Conservator of Forests, Government o

Click Here to Read the rest of this document