NARENDRA MAFATLAL MEHTA Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this group of petitions, the issue raised is common and hence all these petitions are disposed of by a common judgment. Since the facts in all these petitions are more or less similar, for the sake of convenience in this judgment, we have dealt with the facts pertaining to Writ Petition No. 2760 of 1989 and the decision in that petition will apply to all other petitions.

(2.) THE petitioners in Writ Petition No. 2760 of 1989 had purchased various R. E. P. licences issued under the Import and Export Policy April 1985-March 1988 (AM 88 policy for short) for valuable consideration. There is no dispute that the transfer of these R. E. P. licences in favour of the petitioners are valid and that the said licences were valid for a part of the period falling under Import and Export Policy April 1988-March 1991 (AM 91 policy for short ). After the AM 91 policy came into force with effect from 1-4-1988, the petitioners by their letter dated 22-6-1989 requested the respondent/licensing authorities to endorse the transferred licenses under para 186 (1) of the AM 91 policy, so as to enable them to avail the flexibility to the extent permissible under the AM 91 policy. By the impugned letter dated 17-7-1989 the licensing authorities informed the petitioners that in view of para 188 of the AM 91 policy the petitioners are not entitled to seek any endorsement on those transferred licences issued under the AM 88 policy. Challenging the said letter/decision, the present petition has been filed.

(3.) MR. Nankani, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submitted that on the AM 91 policy coming into force with effect from 1-4-1988, in terms of para 186 (1) of AM 91 policy, the petitioners were entitled to seek endorsement on unutilised R. E. P. licenses issued under AM 88 policy. Para 186 (1) of AM 91 policy reads as under: