Executive policy discretion under trade policy blocked interim interference with deletion of the Actual User Condition.

The Andhra Pradesh HC treated the deletion of the Actual User Condition under the Tariff Rate Quota scheme as a policy decision within executive competence under the Foreign Trade Policy and Handbook of Procedures. It noted that Para 2.8 permits an authorisation to include terms and conditions, including the Actual User Condition, showing discretion to impose or omit it. In the absence of clear illegality or constitutional infringement, the Court declined interim interference with the notification and left the Single Judge's order undisturbed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the impugned notification deleting the Actual User Condition under the Tariff Rate Quota scheme warranted interference at the interim stage.

Analysis: The impugned notification was treated as a policy decision within the competence of the Executive under the Foreign Trade Policy and the Handbook of Procedures. Para 2.8 of the Handbook of Procedures (Vol. 1), 2009-14 contemplates that an authorization may contain terms and conditions including the Actual User Condition, which indicates discretion to impose or omit such a condition. In the absence of a clear transgression of law or constitutional limitation, the Court held that judicial interference with such policy matters was unwarranted.

Conclusion: Interference was declined and the challenge to the interim refusal failed.

Final Conclusion: The writ appeal was not entertained for interim relief and the order of the learned Single Judge was left undisturbed.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a fiscal trade measure falls within the Executive's policy discretion and no clear illegality or constitutional violation is shown, courts will not ordinarily interdict it at the interim stage.

---