TMI Blog2017 (3) TMI 342X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for the Shark Fins, according to the petitioner. I am of the considered opinion that if the Shark Fins are not exported, and if there is no local market for the same, it transforms itself into huge waste, and the Government of India suffer adverse financial consequences, even though in a small measure. There is every possibility that the same could generate as a waste, and thereby create environmental pollution also, adding to the already existing adverse environmental conditions - a further short period can be provided to the petitioner to export the same - petition allowed - decided in favor of petitioner. - W.P.(C) No.41383 of 2016 - - - Dated:- 2-2-2017 - SHAJI P. CHALY, J. FOR THE PETITIONER : ADV. SRI.M.A.ABDUL HAKHIM FO ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . of Shark Fins out of its total stock specified above, and that balance 3,788 Kgs. procured much before 09.03.2016 is remaining with the petitioner. Thereupon, petitioner submitted Ext.P17 representation seeking extension of time for export of the remaining products, but the respondent refused to extend the same, stating that it is beyond the directions of this Court in Exts.P4 and P9 judgments. It is thus seeking appropriate reliefs, this writ petition is filed. 4. Respondent has filed a counter affidavit denying the allegations and claims and demands raised by the petitioner. Among other contentions, it is stated that, petitioner has made a representation dated 28.03.2016, seeking to export the Shark Fins, but the same was rejected by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt of early starting of monsoon in May, and continuous rain in June-July, and hence the request of the firm for extension of time for export of pending stock was allowed for three months as per the order dated 09.09.2016. According to the respondent, as per the directives issued by this Court, six months time was provided to export the stock of Shark Fins procured before 09.03.2016, as per orders dated 13.05.2016 and 09.09.2016, and therefore, sufficient time was provided in order to fulfill the export obligations. 6. It is also stated that the Foreign Trade Policy 2015-20 provides for Transitional Arrangement to protect the contractual obligations in respect of any change made in the policy for import or export of an item. Para 1.05(b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oncerned, the same was done by the petitioner much before 09.03.2016, which was the cut-off period consequent to the continuance of the stay in the proceedings pertaining to Ext.P4 judgment. Even though the notification was upheld by this Court as per Ext.P4 judgment, a rider was provided thereunder to consider the request of the petitioner with respect to the export obligation already committed by the petitioner. It was thereupon and by virtue of Ext.P9 judgment, orders were passed by the respondent dated 13.05.2016 and 09.09.2016, permitting the petitioner to export the Shark Fins. However, due to reasons beyond the control of the petitioner, as contended, petitioner could export only 11,581 Kgs. of Shark Fins. It was thereupon that petit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
