2022 (4) TMI 794 - SC - Customs

Registration for import of poppy seed from China - fixation of country cap and initiation of registration process - Public Notice No. 1/2022 dated 7-1-2022 - HELD THAT - The apprehension can be assuaged by directing the petitioners to accept the applications to be filed by the respondent(s) herein within one week from today. This relaxation will apply only to the respondent(s) before this Court and none-else; and this order shall not be treated as precedent in any other case as it is being passed in exercise of plenary powers under Article 142 of the Constitution of India. Thus it is not necessary to dilate on the correctness of the judgment under challenge in the present special leave petitions except to observe that the High Court ought not to have departed from the policy in vogue - SLP disposed off.

Summary

Issues:
Import guidelines for poppy seeds from China and Turkey, application for registration, cut-off date for filing applications, relaxation of deadline, exercise of plenary powers under Article 142, correctness of the judgment under challenge, departure from policy by High Court.

Analysis:
The Supreme Court considered the import guidelines for poppy seeds from China and Turkey. The petitioners highlighted the revised guidelines for import of poppy seeds from China, approved by the competent authority and communicated to the Central Bureau of Narcotics. A specific Public Notice was issued inviting applications for registration of sales contracts for importing poppy seeds from China. Similar notifications were issued for poppy seeds from Turkey in the same year. The respondent(s) were advised to avail the benefits of these notifications and apply for registration.

The respondent(s) expressed willingness to accept the proposal but raised concerns about the cut-off date for filing applications possibly having passed. To address this, the Court directed the petitioners to accept applications from the respondent(s) within one week from the date of the order. This relaxation was limited to the respondent(s) in the present case and was not to set a precedent for other cases, being an exercise of plenary powers under Article 142 of the Constitution of India.

The Court decided to dispose of the special leave petitions without delving into the correctness of the judgment under challenge. However, it criticized the High Court for departing from the prevailing policy, particularly in paragraph 20 of the impugned judgment. The Supreme Court explicitly stated its disapproval of this departure from policy. The Court concluded by disposing of the special leave petitions and also disposing of any pending applications.