9911796707
TMI Blog1994 (2) TMI 180X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ers) urged that the appeal is liable to be dismissed in view of the fact that the same circular was quashed by other High Courts in similar circumstances and the Govt. while accepting the judgments in those cases has already made payments to the parties concerned. Therefore, it is urged that it is not open to the Govt. to agitate the same question now. The Govt. cannot be permitted to discriminate against the writ petitioners herein who have raised claims which are identical to those whose claims have been already honoured as per the judgments of respective High Courts in their cases. The point is well taken and we feel that the Union of India cannot be permitted to continue to agitate the same question once it has accepted the judgments in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ording to the petitioners the discontinuance of the Cash Compensatory Support with effect from 1-1-1979 is in violation of the terms held out by the appellants (respondents 1 and 2 in the writ petition) for granting cash assistance for export of ready-made garments. The petitioners claim that they were induced to enter into firm contracts with various buyers at prices lower than which they would have otherwise charged taking into consideration the cash compensatory allowances offered by the Govt. under the said Scheme. The Scheme itself was meant to support the price to be quoted by Indian exporters in international market. The support was necessary because the international price was lower as compared to prices in India. Withdrawal of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l such firm contracts. 3. The learned Counsel for the appellant has urged the following points to challenge the judgment under appeal :- (i) The respondents (writ petitioners) did not base their prices on the Cash Compensatory Scheme. Therefore, they did not suffer financially. (ii) Ingredients of Prommisory Estoppel are not met. (iii) The Govt. has a right to change its policy. So far as the first point is concerned it is relevant to notice the object behind grant of Cash Compensatory Support. The object was to offset the losses to the trade which would result if exports were made keeping in view the prevailing international market. The prevailing international price of the garments covered under the Scheme was low and in orde ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he Cash Compensatory Support was an extra profit. This appears to be totally misconceived and also contrary to the very object of the Scheme. This finds further support from the reasons given for withdrawal of the Scheme with effect from 1-1-1979. The reason given is that the floor price of the categories of garments in respect of which Cash Compensatory Support was withdrawn had substantially risen in the international market and more particularly in the countries in respect of which the said decision was applicable. This establishes that exporters entering into contracts prior to 1-1-1979 would do so at a loss and would need the cash assistance under the said Scheme to compensate for the loss. Thus it is wrong to say that the petitioner ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
