2009 (7) TMI 735 - HC - Central Excise

Beedi - Exemption - The petitioner is an Association known as South Tamil Nadu Beedi Manufacturers Association whose members are manufacturers of Beedi. The petitioners are all manufacturers of Beedi. In all these writ petitions, the challenge is to paragraph 2 of notification issued by the Central Government in GSR 140(E) Department of Civil supplies dated 7-3-97 withdrawing exemption in respect of Beedi Packages originally contained in Rule 34(c) of the Standard of Weights and Measures (Packages Commodities) Rules, 1977. Held that - no challenge that Central Govt. exceeded in its rule making power. Hardship caused to manufacturers or workers cannot be ground to strike down the rule. Government to consider such factors and court cannot take role of legislature. Granting exemption to particular commodity, policy matter of Govt. and court cannot interfere.

Summary

Issues:
Challenge to withdrawal of exemption in respect of Beedi Packages under notification issued by Central Government.

Analysis:
The judgment involved a challenge to the withdrawal of exemption in respect of Beedi Packages under a notification issued by the Central Government. The petitioners, including an Association and various Beedi manufacturers, contended that the sudden withdrawal of the exemption without any valid reason would lead to hardships for both the manufacturers and workers in the Beedi industry. They argued that the notification would result in reduced earnings for workers and potential job losses due to mechanization of the packing process. The petitioners did not challenge the legality of the Rule itself but raised concerns about the adverse impact on their industry.

The Court examined the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976, and the relevant Rules to understand the context of the dispute. It noted that the petitioners did not challenge the constitutionality of the Rule or the notification on legal grounds but primarily focused on the economic hardships that would result from the withdrawal of the exemption. The Court emphasized that the power to grant exemptions and make policy decisions regarding commodities lies with the Government, and the Court cannot interfere in such matters unless there is a clear violation of constitutional provisions or legal limits.

The judgment highlighted that while there may be hardships faced by the petitioners due to the withdrawal of the exemption, such economic considerations are not sufficient grounds for the Court to strike down a Rule or notification. The Court reiterated that the role of the judiciary is not to legislate or interfere with policy decisions made by the Government. It suggested that if the petitioners have grievances regarding the exemption withdrawal, they should address them to the Government for appropriate action. Ultimately, the Court dismissed the writ petitions, emphasizing that the petitioners' economic concerns do not warrant judicial intervention in matters of policy and exemptions under the law.