Court disposes of writ appeal as govt merges importers' categories for poppy seeds, rendering challenge moot.

The court disposed of the writ appeal after the government decided to repeal the categorization of importers into Category-A and Category-B for importing poppy seeds from Turkey, opting to treat all applicants under one category. The appellant acknowledged this change, rendering the challenge moot. The court recorded the withdrawal of the impugned notification, allowing the appellant to submit its application within a week without setting a precedent. The court directed the government to expedite the registration of contracts. Pending interlocutory applications were deemed irrelevant and disposed of, with no order as to costs.

---

---

Issues:
Challenge to government policy categorizing importers in Category-A and Category-B for importing poppy seeds from Turkey.

Analysis:
The judgment pertains to an appeal against the rejection of an application under Article 226 of the Constitution challenging the government's policy of categorizing importers into Category-A and Category-B for importing poppy seeds from Turkey. The Hon'ble Single Judge had initially rejected the challenge, leading to the appeal. However, during the appeal hearing, it was revealed that the government had reconsidered the matter. The Additional Solicitor General informed the court that the government had decided to repeal the categorization and treat all applicants under one category. The appellant's counsel acknowledged this development, rendering the challenge to the policy moot. Despite the appellant not applying for an import license due to the challenge, the government, in a gesture of fairness, allowed the appellant to submit its application within a week without setting a precedent for future cases.

The court, with the consent of both parties, disposed of the writ appeal by recording the withdrawal of the impugned notification categorizing importers into two categories. The government's decision to treat all applicants in one category was noted. Even though the deadline for filing the application had passed, the respondents agreed to accept the appellant's application if submitted within a week, emphasizing that it would not create a precedent. The court directed the respondents to expedite the registration of contracts in light of the developments.

Subsequently, the writ appeal was disposed of, leading to the conclusion that the pending interlocutory applications were no longer relevant and were also disposed of. The court made no order as to costs in this matter.

---