Import-control release orders may be cancelled for fraud or breach when the scheme expressly authorises hearing and review.

Import-control rules governing release orders for imported steel allowed both allotment and cancellation within one integrated administrative scheme. Paragraph 292 authorised cancellation or suspension where a release order was obtained by fraud, misrepresentation, breach of conditions, contravention of the import policy, or misuse, provided a reasonable hearing was given. The Court accepted that executive power under Article 73 extended to such matters within Parliament's competence and that administrative import-control instructions could validly regulate cancellation. It therefore held that the allottee had no absolute vested right to retain the quota against lawful cancellation for misrepresentation or breach, and the challenge to action under paragraph 292 failed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the licensing authority could cancel or render ineffective release orders issued under the Import Trade Control Rules and procedure by invoking paragraph 292, and whether such action was unsupported by law or violative of the allottee's rights under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

Analysis: Paragraph 97 governed allotment of imported steel through release orders, while paragraph 292 expressly enabled cancellation or suspension of a release order where it was obtained by fraud, misrepresentation, contravention of the rules or import policy, breach of conditions, or misuse, after giving a reasonable opportunity of hearing. The Rules and procedure constituted an integrated administrative scheme for both allotment and cancellation. The Court held that the Union's executive power extends to matters within Parliament's legislative competence under Article 73 of the Constitution of India, and that administrative instructions forming the import control policy could validly regulate allotment and cancellation of release orders. On that basis, the allottee had no absolute vested right to retain the quota irrespective of misrepresentation or breach, and the proposed action under paragraph 292 was within authority.

Conclusion: The cancellation process under paragraph 292 was upheld as authorised by law, and the challenge failed.

Ratio Decidendi: Where an import-control scheme expressly provides both for allotment and for cancellation of release orders on specified grounds after hearing, the executive may act within that scheme under Article 73, and no absolute vested right arises in the allottee to defeat cancellation for misrepresentation or breach.

---