Government's Import Quota Rules Upheld

The Central Government's amendment to impose quantitative restrictions per importer under the Foreign Trade Act was justified to ensure fair distribution of import quotas for poppy seeds. The guidelines for registration and selection process did not violate fundamental rights. The public notices fixing import caps were lawful and aimed at transparency. The petitioners failed to show grounds to interfere with the import policy conditions. Consequently, the writ petitions were dismissed as the impugned actions were deemed lawful and necessary for regulating the import of poppy seeds.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Justification of the Central Government in amending import policy condition No.3(c) to impose quantitative restrictions per importer under Section 3 of the Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Act, 1992.
2. Whether the guidelines for registration of sale contracts for import of poppy seeds from Turkey and China, restricting applicants to register for a maximum of ninety metric tons and selection through 'draw of lots', violate fundamental rights under Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India.
3. Whether the public notices dated 4.11.2016 and 5.12.2016 issued by the Narcotics Commissioner, Government of India, Ministry of Finance, Central Bureau of Narcotics, fixing the final country cap for import of poppy seeds from Turkey and China, should be quashed.
4. Whether the petitioners have made out a case to interfere with condition No.3(c) of the amended import policy issued by the Central Government under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Justification of the Central Government in Amending Import Policy:
The Central Government is justified in amending condition No.3(c) of the import policy to impose quantitative restrictions per importer under Section 3 of the Foreign Trade Act. The amendment was made to address the issues arising from previous policies and to ensure a fair distribution of import quotas among all traders. The policy aims to prevent monopolies and ensure that the import of poppy seeds is regulated efficiently. The Central Government's power under Section 3(2) of the Foreign Trade Act allows it to impose such restrictions to regulate foreign trade, and the amendment aligns with this provision.

2. Violation of Fundamental Rights Under Article 19(1)(g):
The guidelines for registration of sale contracts for import of poppy seeds from Turkey and China, which restrict applicants to a maximum of ninety metric tons and use a 'draw of lots' for selection, do not violate the fundamental rights under Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India. The restrictions are reasonable and necessary to prevent monopolies and ensure fair distribution among traders. The guidelines are in accordance with Article 19(6) of the Constitution, which allows for reasonable restrictions in the interest of the general public.

3. Quashing of Public Notices Dated 4.11.2016 and 5.12.2016:
The petitioners have not made out a case to quash the public notices dated 4.11.2016 and 5.12.2016 issued by the Narcotics Commissioner. The public notices were issued in compliance with the guidelines set by the Central Government and are in accordance with the amended import policy. The guidelines and public notices aim to ensure a fair and transparent process for the registration of import contracts and the allocation of import quotas.

4. Interference with Condition No.3(c) of the Amended Import Policy:
The petitioners have not made out a case to interfere with condition No.3(c) of the amended import policy. The Central Government's decision to amend the policy and impose quantitative restrictions is a policy decision made in the interest of regulating the import of poppy seeds efficiently and fairly. The amendment is within the powers granted to the Central Government under Section 3(2) of the Foreign Trade Act and does not violate any constitutional provisions.

Conclusion:
The impugned notification, guidelines, and public notices issued by the Central Government and the Narcotics Commissioner are in accordance with the law. The restrictions imposed are reasonable and necessary to ensure fair distribution of import quotas and to prevent monopolies. The petitioners have not demonstrated any violation of their fundamental rights or any grounds to quash the public notices or interfere with the amended import policy. Therefore, the writ petitions are dismissed.

---