R.P. INTERNATIONAL Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, a proprietorship firm having its office at Amritsar, has invoked writ jurisdiction to seek vindication of Duty Free Import Authorization (DFIA) No. 0310663555, dated 4-11-2011 (Annexure P-3) originally issued with 24 months validity to the exporter M/s. Gill and Co. Pvt. Ltd. The DFIA issued under Standard Input Output Norm (SION) J-373 which permitted duty free import of 'Pesticides'. The DFIA stipulates that the "Insecticides allowed for import with technical characteristics, specifications and quality as per schedule I of Insecticide Act 1968". According to the petitioner, the Policy Circular No. 72, dated 24-3-2009 (Annexure P-3A at page 37) and Norms Committee Decision dated 31-5-2012 (Annexure P-9 at page 43) were applicable for permitting such duty free-imports. It is claim of the petitioner that due to continued erroneous approach of the respondent-authorities the DFIA could not be utilized for import of 'Pesticides' during its validity period after its purchase on 1-2-2013 from M/s. Pacific Security Solutions Pvt. Ltd., who is also a transferee of the said DFIA Licenses. It is claimed by the petitioner that during the relevant period and even thereafter, the respondents continued to cause various impediments in utilization of the DFIAs for duty free import of 'Pesticides', which were beyond the control of the petitioner. Various developments have been shown on behalf of the petitioner to support the petition, for inter alia, seeking directions for revalidation of DFIA, so that the same can be utilized for duty free clearance of 'pesticides'.

(2.) The petition was strongly opposed by the respondents. It was mainly contended orally, in the reply and in additional affidavit that :-

(3.) The petition is liable to be dismissed with costs as the same is filed after gross delay after having failed to utilize the DFIA for own negligence on merely hypothetical issues. Neither any adverse or coercive action in respect of the said DFIA was taken by the respondents, nor was any explanation sought from the exporter in respect of the subject DFIA. The petitioner has not produced any documentary evidence as to where DFGT and customs authorities have denied the utilization of DFIA License during its validity period. In this regard, reliance has been made to citation M/s. Rup Diamonds and Others v. Union of India and Others - 1989 (2) SCC 356 : 1989 (40) E.L.T. 226 (S.C.); Chennai Metropolitan Water Supply and Sewerage Board and Others v. T.T. Murali Babu - 2014 (4) SCC 108; Sawaran Lata etc. v. State of Haryana and Others - 2010 (4) SCC 532 and M/s. Tilokchand Motichand and Others v. H.B. Munshi, Commissioner of Sales Tax, Bombay and Another - 1969 (1) SCC 110.