Strict compliance with export exemption conditions required; mandamus cannot compel permission contrary to a valid prohibition.

A writ of mandamus cannot compel authorities to permit export contrary to a valid export notification, and exemption clauses in such a notification must be strictly satisfied. The court found that the exporter did not meet the prescribed exceptional conditions, including loading, vessel arrival or berthing, customs handover, or entry into the customs station supported by verifiable time-stamped evidence, nor any specific governmental permission for food-security related export. Substantial compliance was inapplicable because the requirements went to the essence of the exemption, and the later trade notice did not cure the failure to satisfy the substantive preconditions. The challenge therefore failed, and export permission was refused.

---

---

Issues: Whether the petitioner was entitled to a writ of mandamus directing the authorities to permit export of Non-Basmati White Rice after the export policy was amended from "free" to "prohibited", despite the petitioner not satisfying the exceptions carved out in the notification.

Analysis: The export restriction introduced by Notification No. 20/2023 took immediate effect and permitted export only in the specified exceptional situations. On the facts found, the petitioner did not satisfy any of the conditions relating to commencement of loading before the notification, berthing or arrival of the vessel with the relevant allocation before the notification, handover of the consignment to Customs or entry into the Customs Station before the notification with verifiable time-stamped evidence, or any governmental permission for food-security related export. The later trade notice did not assist the petitioner because the substantive preconditions remained unfulfilled. The Court accepted the view that a writ of mandamus cannot be issued to direct the State to act contrary to its own lawful notification, and that exemptions in such notifications must be construed strictly. The doctrine of substantial compliance was held inapplicable because the requirements went to the essence of the exemption and were not merely procedural. The decisions relied upon by the petitioner were distinguished on facts.

Conclusion: The petitioner was not entitled to the requested export permission, and the writ petition failed.

Final Conclusion: The challenge to the export restriction did not succeed, and the statutory prohibition with its limited exceptions was upheld on the facts of the case.

Ratio Decidendi: A writ of mandamus cannot be issued to compel the authorities to permit an act prohibited by a valid export notification, and an exporter seeking the benefit of a notification-based exemption must strictly satisfy the prescribed conditions.

---