Natural justice in Foreign Trade Policy relaxation demands reasoned consideration and effective hearing before rejecting hardship-based relief.

The Foreign Trade Policy's relaxation framework under paragraphs 2.59 and 2.60 permits relief for genuine hardship and adverse trade impact, and contemplates personal hearing in grievance redressal. A rejection of a request to treat two export shipments under the Advance Authorisation Scheme was found to be mechanical because the hardship plea based on technical transmission failure was not meaningfully examined, and the request for hearing was not effectively addressed. The Delhi High Court treated this as non-application of mind and a breach of natural justice, and the impugned orders were set aside for fresh decision after an effective personal hearing and a reasoned order.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Policy Relaxation Committee's rejection of the request to treat the two export shipments under the Advance Authorisation Scheme, and the refusal to grant personal hearing, were vitiated by non-application of mind and breach of the principles of natural justice under the Foreign Trade Policy.

Analysis: Paragraphs 2.59 and 2.60 of the Foreign Trade Policy contemplate relaxation, exemption or relief on grounds of genuine hardship and adverse impact on trade, and also provide for personal hearing in grievance redressal. The record showed that the petitioner had pleaded a technical failure in transmission of Advance Authorisation data, had repeatedly sought correction, and had asked for personal hearing, yet the committee rejected the claim without meaningful consideration. The orders were found to be mechanical and unsupported by a reasoned examination of the hardship plea, and the denial of hearing further offended fair procedure. In the absence of any reply from the respondents, the factual assertions remained substantially uncontroverted.

Conclusion: The impugned orders were vitiated for non-application of mind and violation of natural justice, and were liable to be set aside.

Final Conclusion: The matter was sent back for fresh decision by the competent authority after an effective personal hearing and a reasoned order in accordance with law.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the policy itself permits relaxation on genuine hardship and requires fair grievance redressal, a mechanical rejection without meaningful consideration of the hardship plea and without effective personal hearing is liable to be set aside.

---