Foreign trade policy amendment power cannot be exercised by DGFT where statute reserves it to the Central Government.

The Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Act, 1992 vests power to amend the foreign trade policy in the Central Government under Section 5, and Section 6(3) does not authorise the Director General of Foreign Trade to exercise that excluded power under Sections 3, 5, 15, 16 and 19. A notification issued in the Director General's name that in substance amended the import policy was therefore beyond jurisdiction. An administrative order permitting authentication of instruments in the name of the Central Government could not validate an act taken without statutory authority, and arguments based on laying before Parliament did not cure the defect. The notification was held ultra vires and void, and it was quashed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the notification issued by the Director General of Foreign Trade was without jurisdiction and liable to be quashed.

Analysis: The foreign trade policy could be amended only by the Central Government under Section 5 of the Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Act, 1992. Section 6(3) permitted the Central Government to authorise the Director General of Foreign Trade to exercise certain powers, but expressly excluded the powers under Sections 3, 5, 15, 16 and 19. The impugned notification was issued in the name of the Director General and purported to act under Section 3, while in substance it amended the import policy. Since the Director General could not exercise the excluded statutory powers, the notification was not saved by the administrative order authorising authentication of instruments in the name of the Central Government. The discussion on laying before Parliament and other supporting submissions did not cure the absence of jurisdiction.

Conclusion: The notification was ultra vires and void for want of jurisdiction, and was quashed.

---