RAJ PRAKASH CHEMICALS LTD. & ANR. versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS.

Citation: [1986] 1 S.C.R. 448 · Decided: 05-03-1986 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: V.D. TULZAPURKAR · Disposal: Dismissed

Cited by 3 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

448 
A 
RAJ PRAKASH CHl!MICALS LTD. & ANR, 
v. 
UNION OF INDIA & ORS, 
MARCH 5, 1986 
B 
[V,D. TULZAPURKAR; R.S. PATHAK AND SABYASACHI MUKHARJI, JJ,] 
Practice & Procedure 
Order of Court - Construction of - To be consistent with 
c 
principle that Court IJllJSt be presumed to have given effect to 
the law. 
The first appellant, a public limited company, engaged 
in the manufacture of acrylic ester monOlll!rs (Butyl Acrylate, 
Bthyl Acrylate, 2-Ethyl Hexyl Acrylate and Methyl Acrylate) 
D 
under 
an 
industrial 
licence 
granted in February 
197 5.,, 
cOlllllellCed ll&nllfacture in December 1980 and was until then the 
only manufacturer in India. In the year 1981 a public sector 
organisation also began to manufacture acrylic ester mo-ra • 
. 
In the period before 1980 in the absence ·of indigenous 
E 
manufacture of acrylic ester monomers, the Govenment of India 
permitted the import of those iteus on Open General Licence. 
Thereafter, in the Import Policy 1981-82, with a view to 
protect indigenous industry and to conserve foreign exchange· 
the Government of India placed acrylic ester monomers in 
Appendix 5 (List of Restricted lte11S), and in July, 1981 Ethyl~ 
F 
Acrylate wss taken from Appendix 5 to Appendix 3 (List of 
Banned lteus). A public notice dated July 7, 1981 announced 
that Export Houses which were eligible to import Ethyl 
Acrylate would be allowed to import it only to the extent of 
irrevocable Letters of Credit opened before the dste of the 
notice. 
G 
H 
Under Import Policy 1982-83, the tl01ll!llclature of the 
headings of the Appendices wss altered, and the heading "Li&~ 
of Banned Items" of Appendix 3 was changed to "List of Limited 
Permissible Items". Likewise, the heading "Absolutely Banned 
List" of Appendix 4 was altered to "List of Non-permissible 
RAJ PRAKASH v. u.o.I. 
449 
~tems (Banned)". And the heading "List of Restricted Ite1111" of 
Appendix 5 became the "List of Automatic Permissible Ite1111"., 
Ethyl Acrylate remained in Appendix 3 and all other acrylic 
ester monomers remained in Appendix 5. 
Under Import Policy 1983-84, the headings of Appendices 
3, 4 and 5 remained as they were, and all four acrylic ester 
monomers 
were 
placed 
in Appendix 
3 
(List 
of 
Limited 
"Permissible Items). 
A 
B 
'Under Import Policy 1984-85 Appendix 2 Part A became the 
"List of Banned Items" and Appendix 2 Part B became the "List 
C 
of Restricted Items". Appendix 3 continued to be the "List of 
Limited Permissible Items". Appendix 5 was the "List of 
Canalised Items". Appendix 6 mentioned the import of ite1111 
under Open General Licence. 
That nomenclature and arrangement was reflected again 
D 
-,.under Import Policy 1985-88, except that Appendix 4 was 
deleted and the new Appendix 6 (the "Open General Licence" 
List) contained Part II which listed items open to import 
under Export House Additional Licence. Under both Import 
Policies, 1984-85 and 1985-88 the four acrylic ester monomers 
appeared at item 9 of Appendix 3 (List of Limited Permissible 
E 
Items). 
, 
Changes in the nomenclature of the headings of the 
Appendices in the Import Policy 1982-83 and thereafter were 
considered necessary to bridge the gap in India's balance of 
-ipayment. The change in the nomenclature did not alter the 
F 
principle underlying the grouping of items under the various 
heads. Each grouping was determined in acco.rdance with two 
major objectives of import policy, the conserving of foreign 
exchange 
and 
protecting 
the 
development 
of 
indigenous 
industries. 
by 
limiting 
the 
import 
of 
corresponding 
manufactured products. The items in Appendix 3 (List of 
G 
Limited Permissible Imports) were those whose import was not 
'fp_ermissible 
ordinarily 
but 
could 
be 
permitted 
by 
the 
'Government if their import was necessary and justified, while 
the import of ite1111 absolutely banned (and later simply 
described as "Banned") was not permissible at all. 
The Import Policy 1978-79 incorporated a scheme under 
which Registered Exporters were eligible for the grant of 
H 
A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
H 
450 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[1986] 1 S.C.R. 
Export House Certificates on the basis of the exports actuall~ 
made in the three-year base period 1975-76, 1976-77 and .1977-
78. Export Houses were entitled to the following facilities:-
(i) Import replenishment licences'eligible to them 
as registered Exporters, 
(ii) Import replenishment licences transferred to 
them by others. 
.• 
(Hi) Import of 
items 

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.