Import Policy limits on additional licences barred dry fruit imports where later policy restricted the goods

Additional licences granted on restitutionary grounds did not permit import of dry fruits where the goods were not importable under both the earlier and prevailing import policies, or where the later policy placed them in a restricted category. Dry fruits, other than cashewnuts and dates, were freely importable under the 1978-79 policy, but they were not open to import under the 1985-88 policy and could not be brought in under the general raw-material category because they were consumer goods of agricultural origin. The challenge on Article 32 maintainability also failed on the facts, as the absence of objection to an interim order did not defeat the grievance.

---

---

Issues: Whether diamond exporters holding additional licences under the Import Policy 1978-79 were entitled to import dry fruits during the period 1985-88, and whether the writ petition under Article 32 was maintainable.

Analysis: Dry fruits (other than cashewnuts and dates) were freely importable under the Import Policy 1978-79, so no restitutionary right arose from the wrongful refusal of additional licences for that item. Under the Import Policy 1985-88, dry fruits were no longer open to import under the Open General Licence and could not be brought in under paragraph 181(3), as the exporters were not dealers engaged in that trade. They also could not rely on item 1 of Appendix 6 because dry fruits fell within item 121 of Appendix 2 Part-B as consumer goods of agricultural origin, which excluded them from that general raw-material category. On the construction earlier placed on the import orders, holders of additional licences could import only those goods that were available under the earlier policy and were not specifically banned under the prevailing policy, and dry fruits did not satisfy that test. The challenge to maintainability failed because the absence of objection to an interim order did not defeat the petitioners' grievance.

Conclusion: The exporters were not entitled to import dry fruits under the additional licences, and the writ petition under Article 32 was maintainable.

Final Conclusion: The import of dry fruits by the respondents under the additional licences was prohibited for the relevant period, and the High Court's contrary view was set aside.

Ratio Decidendi: Additional licences granted on restitutionary grounds do not authorise import of goods that were not importable under both the earlier policy and the prevailing policy, or that fall within the restricted or banned categories under the later policy.

---