Cotton seeds for animal feed fall under Schedule-VII, and later restrictive quarantine amendments do not apply retrospectively.

Cotton seeds imported for animal feed are treated under Schedule-VII of the Plant Quarantine (Regulation of import into India) Order, 2003, because that schedule covers animal feed as a separate import category and the term "seeds" is confined to sowing or propagation. The 27.12.2017 amendment defining animal feed in kibbled-crushed, pellet or dried cake form was held to introduce new restrictions rather than merely clarify the earlier scheme, so it could not govern prior imports retrospectively. Clearance of consignments should not be refused outright where quarantine safeguards can address the risk, and release may be conditioned on germination testing and an undertaking against sale in seed form.

---

---

Issues: (i) whether cotton seeds imported for animal feed were governed by Schedule-V or Schedule-VII of the Plant Quarantine (Regulation of import into India) Order, 2003; (ii) whether the amendment dated 27.12.2017 defining "Animal Feed" as kibbled-crushed seeds/pellet/dried cake form was clarificatory and applicable to the imports in question; (iii) whether the respondents could refuse clearance of the consignments and insist on re-export or destruction.

Issue (i): whether cotton seeds imported for animal feed were governed by Schedule-V or Schedule-VII of the Plant Quarantine (Regulation of import into India) Order, 2003.

Analysis: Section 3(1) of the Destructive Insects and Pests Act, 1914 empowers regulation of imports likely to cause infection to crops. Under the Order, "grain" means seeds intended for processing or consumption and not for sowing or propagation, while "seeds" means seeds intended for sowing or propagating and not for consumption or processing. Schedule-V specifically covers cotton seeds for sowing, subject to stricter conditions. Schedule-VII contains a separate entry for animal feeds with less stringent requirements. On this framework, cotton seeds imported for animal consumption cannot be confined to Schedule-V merely because they are cotton seeds.

Conclusion: cotton seeds imported for animal feed fall within Schedule-VII, not Schedule-V, and may be imported subject to the conditions applicable to animal feed.

Issue (ii): whether the amendment dated 27.12.2017 defining "Animal Feed" as kibbled-crushed seeds/pellet/dried cake form was clarificatory and applicable to the imports in question.

Analysis: Before the amendment, Schedule-VII permitted animal feed as a distinct import category without defining it in the restrictive terms later introduced. The amendment added fresh conditions by requiring the feed to be in kibbled-crushed, pellet or dried cake form and therefore could not be treated as merely clarificatory. The amended definition could not retrospectively control imports already made.

Conclusion: the amendment was not clarificatory and did not govern the impugned imports.

Issue (iii): whether the respondents could refuse clearance of the consignments and insist on re-export or destruction.

Analysis: The Court accepted the regulatory concern that whole seeds may be capable of sowing and that plant quarantine risks required safeguards, but found that an outright refusal to clear the goods was unwarranted on the record. The proper course was to permit clearance with safeguards ensuring that the seeds were not viable for sowing and were not sold in seed form. The Court therefore directed germination testing and an undertaking that the goods would be crushed or kibbled before final sale.

Conclusion: the refusal order was set aside and clearance was directed, subject to protective conditions.

Final Conclusion: the petitions succeeded in part, the impugned refusal was not sustained, and the consignments were ordered to be released on compliance with the prescribed safeguards.

Ratio Decidendi: where a regulatory order distinguishes between seeds for sowing and grain or animal feed for consumption, cotton seeds imported for animal feed cannot be denied clearance under the sowing-entry merely because they are whole seeds, and a later restrictive amendment cannot be applied retrospectively as a clarificatory measure.

---