Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + HC Customs - 2023 (10) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (10) TMI 966 - DELHI HIGH COURTConditions of eligibility and procedure for allocation of quota for export of broken rice on humanitarian food security grounds - Conditions restricting the eligibility for securing allocation of quota to only those exporters, who had exported rice to the countries in question (Senegal, Gambia and Indonesia) in the three preceding financial years. Whether restricting the allocation of quota for export of broken rice to only those exporters that had exported rice to the respective countries in question prior to such exports being prohibited, bears a nexus to the object of ensuring “capacity and quality”? HELD THAT:- The Court is neither required to ascertain the best classification for achieving the objective of such classification nor evaluate the efficacy of the same. The Court is merely required to ascertain whether the classification has any rational nexus with the object sought to be served. It is also well settled that a classification is not required to be “scientifically perfect or logically complete” - The classification need not be mathematically accurate and cannot be called into question merely because it is disadvantageous to certain individuals or class of persons. However, it is equally well settled that the intelligible differentia to support the classification must be “real and substantial”. In the present case, there is no material on record, which would even remotely suggest that persons who have exported broken rice to the respective countries would have a higher capacity to export rice or the quality of broken rice to be exported by them would in any way be superior than that which may be exported by rice exporters who had exported to other countries in the past. There is also no material to indicate that the channels of export to the countries in question are different from the channels of export to other countries. The underlying assumption of the classification is that the rice exporters who had exported rice to the countries in question in part have comparatively assured capacity to export broken rice and to ensure their quality. This assumption is not founded on any material or rational basis. In the present case, the export of rice from this country does not entail distribution of rice in the country importing foodgrains. In most cases, the exporter’s obligation is discharged on loading the goods in question on a vessel in India (if the export is by sea). There is not even a suggestion that export of rice to the countries in question involves any special procedure or would yield any special experience - The counter affidavit filed by the respondents also does not set out any material to suggest that the rice exporters having a past experience of exporting rice in a particular country, would be better placed to service the export orders from that country in comparison with other exporters with established track record. It is apparent that the policy of canalizing exports of manganese ore had a clear nexus with the object sought to be achieved. Established miners and shippers were also permitted to continue exporting ore to ensure that existing export arrangements were not impacted. In the facts of the present case, the respondent has not produced any material to establish any rational nexus between the restricting the export quote to rice exporters that had exported rice during the three financial years preceding prohibition of export of broken rice, and the object of ensuring capacity and quality. The impugned trade notice set aside - respondents may re-evaluate the criteria for allocation of quota for export of broken rice - application disposed off.
|