Court affirms gang saw machine import license requirement, dismisses contempt petition, petitioner to pay costs.

The court upheld the requirement for gang saw machines for import licenses, deeming it reasonable and aimed at promoting domestic industry. The court found no mala fides or unreasonableness in the challenged circular and notification. Additionally, the court dismissed the contempt petition, ruling that the rejection of the import license application predated the court order, absolving the respondents of contempt. The petitioner was directed to pay Rs. 10,000 in costs to the respondents.

---

---

Issues Involved:

1. Challenge to DGFT circular and notification imposing gang saw machine requirement for import license.
2. Reasonableness and arbitrariness of the gang saw machine requirement.
3. Compliance with judicial orders and alleged contempt of court.

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Challenge to DGFT Circular and Notification:

The petitioner, an importer of rough marble blocks/slabs, challenged a circular dated 23rd October 2009 and a notification dated 15th October 2009 issued by the DGFT. The petitioner argued that the requirement to install a gang saw machine to secure an import license was unreasonable and impractical. The petitioner contended that this condition was introduced with insufficient notice, making compliance within the stipulated time frame impossible.

2. Reasonableness and Arbitrariness of the Gang Saw Machine Requirement:

The court examined whether the gang saw machine requirement was arbitrary or irrational. It noted that the policy shift from a dual to a unified policy was a well-deliberated decision aimed at curtailing monopoly in the marble trade and encouraging domestic industry. The court emphasized that policy decisions involve complex evaluations and balancing of various interests, and judicial review should not extend to questioning the wisdom of such decisions unless they are shown to be mala fide, arbitrary, or unreasonable.

The court found that the requirement for gang saw machines had a basis in the deliberations of the Committee of the Secretaries (COS) and was part of a broader strategy to regulate the marble trade. It acknowledged that the policy change did not happen overnight and that traders were aware of the evolving criteria. The court held that the policy was not arbitrary or unreasonable, as it aimed to promote investment and equitable distribution of import entitlements.

3. Compliance with Judicial Orders and Alleged Contempt of Court:

The petitioner argued that the rejection of its application for an import license violated a court order dated 11th November 2009, which directed the respondents not to reject the application. The court examined the records and found that the decision to reject the application was taken on 10th November 2009, prior to the court's order. The rejection letter dated 16th November 2009 was issued based on this decision. The court concluded that there was no contempt of court, as the decision to reject the application predated the court's order.

Conclusion:

The court dismissed the writ petition, finding no case of mala fides or unreasonableness in the issuance of the impugned circular and notification. It upheld the policy requiring the installation of gang saw machines for import licenses, emphasizing the need to balance various interests and promote domestic industry. The court also dismissed the contempt petition, concluding that the respondents did not wilfully disobey the court's order. The petitioner was ordered to pay costs of Rs. 10,000 to the respondents.

---