9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
Challenge to denial of benefit under Clause 66 of Export-Import Policy 1992-97. Analysis: The writ petition challenged the denial of benefit under Clause 66 of the Export-Import Policy 1992-97. The petitioner applied for an Advance Licence under the Value Based Advance Licence Scheme in March 1997, and the application was approved shortly after. The petitioner exported electronic goods, entitling it to a Value Based Free Licence. A significant plea in the petition highlighted the approval date of the application, which was contested by the respondents. The petitioner argued that the approval entitled it to invoke the norms in force on the application date, regardless of subsequent policy changes. The respondents claimed the petitioner had options under a new policy circular from April 1997, allowing for conversion or drawback. The primary issue was the interpretation of Clause 66, with the respondents contending the petitioner was bound by new norms from April 1997. However, the court held that the petitioner could rely on the norms in force on the application date, irrespective of subsequent changes. The court ruled in favor of the petitioner, directing the respondents to process the application based on the norms in force on the application date, i.e., March 18, 1997, within eight weeks. This judgment clarifies the entitlement of an applicant under Clause 66 of the Export-Import Policy 1992-97 to invoke the norms in force on the date of application approval, regardless of subsequent policy changes. It underscores the importance of upholding vested rights in export licenses granted under the policy. The court's interpretation of the clause ensures that applicants are not unfairly disadvantaged by changes in policy after their application approval. The ruling provides a clear directive to the respondents to process the petitioner's application based on the norms applicable on the date of application, emphasizing the need for adherence to legal provisions in such matters.
|
