2022 (11) TMI 959 - HC - Customs

Constitutional Validity of Entry No.B-3140 of Schedule-VI of the Hazardous and Other wastes (Management and Transboundary Movement) Rules, 2016 and Office Memorandum dated 24.11.2014 - seeking clearance of old and used tyres imported by the petitioner - HELD THAT - The directions issued in the present petitions have worked out for themselves. The interim order and the directions stand consumed by the petitioners as the goods involved in all the petitions have been indisputably released. The Court is not required to delve into further merits to consider the petitions any further as only surviving prayer regarding release of goods has been satisfied - Applications disposed off.

Summary

Issues:
Challenge to Entry No.B-3140 of Schedule-VI of Hazardous and Other Wastes Rules, 2016 and related Office Memorandum and public notice; Clearance of old and used tyres imported by petitioners; Import of old and reusable tyres; Interpretation of hazardous waste regulations; Compliance with Customs Act, 1962.

Analysis:
The petitioners sought to challenge Entry No.B-3140 of Schedule-VI of the Hazardous and Other Wastes (Management and Transboundary Movement) Rules, 2016, along with the Office Memorandum dated 24.11.2014 and public notice dated 27.03.2015 issued by the Commissioner of Customs, Nhava Seva, as ultra vires the Customs Act, 1962. Additionally, they requested the declaration of the Office Memorandum dated 24.11.2014 as ultra vires and sought the clearance of old and used tyres imported by them. The petitioners, engaged in trading old and reusable tyres, argued that importing such tyres was not prohibited. The Commissioner of Customs contended that the imported tyres were hazardous waste, leading to the petitions challenging the restrictions imposed.

In a previous order, the Court directed the responsible authority to inspect the waste pneumatic tyres to determine their quality and reusability. Subsequently, the Court issued directions for the provisional clearance of the imported tyres, subject to conditions ensuring their reusability. The Court also reconsidered the appointment of a Surveyor to examine the issue from an environmental perspective. The developments during the case, including the release of goods by the authorities following the Court's orders, were noted.

The petitioners' advocate confirmed that the goods had been released by the authorities in compliance with the Court's orders. Consequently, the Court found that the directions issued in the petitions had been fulfilled as the goods were released. As a result, the Court concluded that there was no need to further consider the petitions, as the only surviving prayer regarding the release of goods had been satisfied. Any future orders by the authorities on the matter would give rise to a fresh cause of action. Therefore, all Special Civil Applications were disposed of in accordance with the interim order, preserving the rights of both parties for any potential future disputes.