Fair exercise of policy relaxation powers required reconsideration of advance licence clubbing and related export claims.

Discretionary policy powers governing relaxation and clubbing of advance licences must be exercised fairly and with proper consideration of relevant material. The Delhi HC noted that the rejection order did not address the petitioner's exports on free shipping bills, the retrospective extension orders issued under the revival scheme, or comparable instances where similar relief had been granted. Because these factors were capable of supporting clubbing and consequential relief, the refusal was found unsustainable. The matter was directed to be reconsidered by the Policy Relaxation Committee, and if the exports were found relatable to the advance licences, clubbing and consequential relief were to follow.

---

---

Issues: Whether the rejection of the application for procedural relaxation and clubbing of advance licences was sustainable, and whether the matter required reconsideration in light of the petitioner's claim that exports on free shipping bills and the delayed extension orders were wrongly ignored.

Analysis: The petitioner had obtained extensions under the revival scheme, but the extension orders were issued only in July 2010 with retrospective effect, leaving part of the intended period unavailable. The material showed that exports were made during the relevant period, that the system did not accept earlier licence numbers after the change in software and licence numbering, and that exports on free shipping bills had been accepted in other cases. The policy provisions governing clubbing of licences and relaxation were capable of being applied to the petitioner's case, and the later restrictions could not be used to defeat claims relating to earlier licences. The rejection order did not adequately deal with these aspects and did not reflect proper application of mind to the petitioner's specific requests.

Conclusion: The rejection of the petitioner's request was unsustainable. The matter was required to be reconsidered by the Policy Relaxation Committee, and if the exports were found relatable to the advance licences, clubbing and consequential relief were to be granted.

Final Conclusion: The writ petition succeeded to the extent of setting aside the impugned decision and directing fresh consideration of the petitioner's request for relaxation and clubbing of licences.

Ratio Decidendi: Discretionary policy powers must be exercised fairly and non-arbitrarily, and a relaxation request cannot be refused without addressing the relevant material and comparable instances where similar relief has been granted.

---