Open general licence for contraceptive imports requires actual Drugs Controller approval; subordinate endorsement is insufficient.

Import under an open general licence was available only for intra uterine contraceptive devices actually approved by the Drugs Controller, and the importer had to prove that both conditions were met. The record showed the goods were not treated as a drug under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act and that no Drugs Controller approval existed; a no-objection endorsement by a Technical Officer could not substitute for or delegate that approval. The goods were therefore outside the licence entry and confiscation was justified. The confiscation order was also not vitiated by nondisclosure, because the relied-upon correspondence had been made available and the importer had an opportunity to answer it, so no breach of natural justice was established.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the imported goods were covered by the open general licence as intra uterine contraceptive devices approved by the Drugs Controller, and (ii) whether the order of confiscation was vitiated for want of disclosure of relied-upon material.

Issue (i): Whether the imported goods were covered by the open general licence as intra uterine contraceptive devices approved by the Drugs Controller.

Analysis: The import policy allowed only those intra uterine contraceptive devices that were approved by the Drugs Controller, and the burden lay on the importer to establish that both requirements were satisfied. The record showed that the goods were not treated as a drug for the purposes of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940, and the departmental correspondence negatived any approval by the Drugs Controller. The endorsement of no objection by a Technical Officer could not amount to approval by the Drugs Controller, and a subordinate officer could not further delegate the approval power in the absence of authorisation.

Conclusion: The goods did not qualify for clearance under the open general licence, and the confiscation was justified.

Issue (ii): Whether the order of confiscation was vitiated for want of disclosure of relied-upon material.

Analysis: The correspondence relied upon by the adjudicating authority was made available during the proceedings, and the importer was given an opportunity to meet it. The alleged nondisclosure was therefore not established, and no denial of natural justice was made out.

Conclusion: The confiscation order was not invalid on the ground of nondisclosure or breach of natural justice.

Final Conclusion: The imported consignment was held to be outside the permissive import entry, and the absolute confiscation order was sustained.

Ratio Decidendi: Where import under an open general licence is contingent on approval by a designated authority, the importer must prove actual approval by that authority, and an endorsement by a subordinate officer cannot satisfy the requirement absent valid delegation; moreover, disclosure of relied-upon material during adjudication satisfies natural justice.

---