(1.) THE petitioners by this petition claim re-validation of their two REP Licences copies whereof are annexed at Exhibits 'a' and 'b' to the Petition. In the alternative, they pray for issue of two fresh Licences.
(2.) THE Petitioners are exporters of stainless steel castings. On the 19th of March 1984 the petitioners were issued two REP Licences copies whereof are annexed at Exhibits 'a' and 'b' to the Petition. They were valid for a period of 12 months with an additional grace period of two months, for imports of stainless steel melting scrap. Under these licences the petitioners were to open Letters of Credit by 31st of March 1985 and effect shipment on or before 31st of May 1985. The foreign suppliers Messrs. Donarson Ltd. , issued their Proforma Invoice dated 3rd december 1984 whereunder the shipment was to be effected between January and March 1985. On the 11th of December, 1984, the Petitioners applied for an irrevocable Letter of Credit in favour of their foreign suppliers through Laxmi Commercial Bank Ltd. On the 13th of December 1984 an irrevocable Letter of Credit was accordingly opened. The petitioners, however, on the 19th of March, 1985, received a Telex message from their foreign suppliers that the Letter of credit was required to be amended i. e. , the country of origin which was mentioned as U. S. A. was required to be amended as U. K. The shipment could not be effected by March 1985 on account of the aforesaid requirement of the amendment. After the said amendment was carried out, a fresh Proforma Invoice was issued whereunder the shipment was to be effected within the grace period of two months i. e. by May 1985. On the 16th of May 1985, the Petitioners received telex messages from Laxmi Commercial Bank Ltd. , informing them that the Reserve Bank Of india had granted it moratorium from 27th April, 1985 to 23rd August 1985 and the Petitioners should not negotiate any documents under the Letter Of Credit as the Bank would not be able to honour the same. On the 29th of May 1985, the Petitioners requested the Joint Chief Controller of Imports and Exports, the 2nd Respondent herein to re-validate the licences, and by his order dated 21st of June 1985, the request was rejected on the ground that there was no provision in the existing Policy to re-validate the licences of Merchant Exporters. The Petitioners, on the 19th of July 1985 renewed their request but the same was once again rejected by the 2nd Respondent by his order dated 5th August 1985. On the 2nd September 1985 the Petitioners preferred an appeal to the Joint Chief Controller of Imports and Exports, the 3rd Respondent herein, and by order dated 18th of March 1986, the Appeal was dismissed and the Petitioner were informed that the decision of the 2nd Respondent cannot be altered for the reason that there is no provision for re-validation of the licences in the existing Import policy. On the 12th of February 1986, Canara bank informed the Petitioners that it had taken over the Laxmi Commercial Bank Ltd. , On the 23rd of December 1985, the Petitioners requested Ministry of commerce, New Delhi, to re-validate their licences but that requested was rejected by the Controller of Imports and exports, Ministry of Commerce, New Delhi, by his letter dated 28th January 1986. On the 7th of april, 1986, the Petitioners moved a Review Application but the same was rejected by the Order dated 19th of May, 1987 passed by the 1st Respondent. The Petitioners, thus, being dis-satisfied with the decisions of the Respondents, were constrained to file the present petition.
(3.) MR. Bulchandani, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioners, submitted that the department has seriously erred in taking the view that it had no power to re-validate the licences under the existing Import and Export Policy. It is in the case of the Respondents that the petitioners' claim for re-validation would be governed by the Import and Export Policy for April 1985-March 1988. Mr. Bulchandani, by placing reliance on clauses 63, 72, 73, 74 and 80 of the said Policy, contended that such a power was specifically conferred upon the Department.