2011 (6) TMI 611

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... er the Tariff Rate Quota (TRQ) scheme. 3. The appellant claims to be a large scale cultivator of Maize (corn) in large quantity and to have taken up extensive agricultural operations for the purpose and to representing several small and medium farmers involved in the cultivation of Maize, as well. The appellant complains that as a consequence of the notification impugned in the writ petition, the appellant and other farmers, small or medium, would be prejudicially affected as Maize could now be imported without restricting such import for the purposes of Actual Use of the importer; and this would bring down the price of the Maize in Country and thereby render the substantive occupation of the appellant and other farmers unviable econo .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... tes that "every authorization shall be valid for prescribed period of validity and shall contain such terms and conditions as may be specified by RA (Regional Authority) which may include : (a)     Quantity, description and value of goods; (b)     Actual User Condition; (c)     Export obligation; (d)    Value addition to be achieved; and (e)     Minimum export/import price. Sl. No. (b) enumerates : "Actual User Condition". On a true and fair construction of the provisions of Para 2.8, it is clear that "Actual User Condition" may be specified in the authorization by the Regional Authority while granting licence. Expression "may" connotes gran .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... respondent be directed to consider and dispose of the representation before issuing fresh trade licences on the basis of the impugned notification dated 18-5-2011 whereby and whereunder "Actual User Condition" is eschewed from the raft of conditions incorporated in a licence granted under TRQ. This court is not in doubt that the 4th respondent, a public authority, will consider the representation of the petitioner dated 26-5-2011, if made as asserted, expeditiously. We are however not inclined to interdict exercise of discretion and power of the 4th respondent in granting licences or renewing licences, till the representation of the appellant is disposed of as that would unduely impede the discretion and operational efficacy of the 4th resp .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X