Statutory duty to issue inspection certificates cannot be withheld as punishment for alleged past violations despite alternate remedy

A statutory authority could not withhold inspection certificates for current export consignments as a punitive response to alleged past violations where the governing export quality-control framework did not authorise that course. The Court held that the agency was bound to inspect consignments and issue certificates under the statute and rules, and that pending show-cause proceedings on earlier breaches did not justify refusal of current certification. It further held that the availability of an alternative appellate remedy did not bar writ relief on these facts, and directed issuance of the pending certificates while leaving past-violation proceedings to be dealt with in accordance with law.

---

---

Issues: Whether the respondents could withhold inspection certificates for current export consignments on the basis of alleged past violations, and whether the availability of an appellate remedy barred writ relief.

Analysis: The statutory scheme under the Export (Quality Control and Inspection) Act, 1963 and the Export of Honey (Quality Control, Inspection and Monitoring) Rules, 2002 obliged the respondent agency to inspect consignments and issue certificates. The alleged past violations were already the subject of a show-cause process, and no provision was shown authorising the agency to use withholding of current certificates as a punitive measure. The Court held that the agency had to act within the statute and could not withhold certificates arbitrarily or contrary to law. It further held that the existence of an alternative remedy under Rule 7 did not prevent exercise of writ jurisdiction in the facts of the case.

Conclusion: The respondents had no authority to withhold the inspection certificates, and writ relief was warranted to compel performance of their statutory duty.

Final Conclusion: The petition succeeded and the respondents were directed to issue the pending inspection certificates, while leaving open the question of alleged past violations for action in accordance with law.

Ratio Decidendi: A statutory authority entrusted with issuing inspection certificates cannot withhold them as a punitive measure for alleged past breaches unless the governing law expressly authorises such refusal; writ jurisdiction may be exercised to enforce the performance of that statutory duty despite the availability of an alternate remedy.

---