MAHAVIR TRADERS Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner No. 1 is a proprietory concern and petitioner No. 2 is the proprietor thereof. Hereinafter petitioners are referred to as the petitioner. The petitioner manufactures garments and exports ready-made garments. The petitioner feel aggrieved by a change in the export policy made by notice dated 7/03/1984 Respondent-Government of India issued a public notice dated 14/09/1983 and declared a scheme for exports under OGL 3 of Garments and Knitwear to the USA. EEC Member States Australia Finland and Canada for the period commencing from 1/01/1984 to 31/12/1984 The Government issued another notice dated March 1984 and made certain changes in the export scheme. The petitioner has challenged the legality and validity of the change introduced by public notice dated 7/03/1984 and has prayed that the respondents be directed to calculate the export quota without taking into consideration the deemed surrendered pan of the export pursuant to the public notice 1984 and has also prayed for other consequential reliefs. The challenge to the change in the policy is on the ground that it is unseasonable and arbitrary and it is contrary to the earlier policy declaration made on 14/09/1983 and it nullifies the earlier policy declaration. It is submitted that the Government cannot make retrospective amendment in the policy and the Government is estopped from making changes in the policy because the Government is also bound by the doctrine of promissory estoppel.

(2.) The petitioner was issued certificate of entitlement dated 17/12/1983 As per this entitlement the petitioner was allotted export quota of 34 250 pieces of different types of garments falling in category No. 338/39/ 40 to the United States of America. The certificate of entitlement specifically stated that it was subject to all the terms and conditions stipulated in public notice dated 14/09/1983 and as amended from time to time and subject any other conditions notified from time to time by the Apparels Export Promotion Councils i. e. Respondent No. 3 herein. The certificate was valid for export entitlement upto 31/05/1984 After M 31/05/1984 the certificate-holder was required to submit bank guarantee for requisite amount and should have validated the certificate upto 31 Clause 4 of the certificate reads as follows:

(3.) For the year 1985 similar policy declaration was made by the Government on 15/09/1984 The petitioner wrote letter dated 16/10/1984 (Annexure - B) requesting respondent No. 3 to permit him to utilise the quota of 1984 in the month of January 1986 indicating that the petitioner had received orders of large quantities from U. S. A. buyers for October/December 1984. It may be noted that on account of the embargo imposed by the Government of U. S. A. the petitioner could not export 5036 pieces for which the petitioner had furnished bank guarantee as required under clause 4 of the policy. Since the petitioner could not export the same quantity the petitioner requested for realising the bank guarantee by letter dated 2/01/1985