Interlocutory challenge to steel mill capacity rules deferred while interim protection continued subject to payment conditions

The Court declined to decide the validity of Rule 5 of the Hot Re-rolling Steel Mills Annual Capacity Determination (Amendment) Rules, 1997 at the interlocutory stage, since the issue of balance of convenience was still pending before the single Judge. To protect the Revenue, it imposed a temporary interim payment condition on the association members, with automatic discharge of the protection on non-compliance. No final ruling was given on the rule's vires, and the writ appeals were disposed of with liberty to seek early disposal before the single Judge after compliance.

---

---

Issues: Whether the challenge to Rule 5 of the Hot Re-rolling Steel Mills Annual Capacity Determination (Amendment) Rules, 1997 should be examined at the interlocutory stage, and whether interim protection could be continued subject to conditions.

Analysis: The Court declined to enter upon the validity of Rule 5 at that stage, noting that the matter was still pending before the learned single Judge on the question of balance of convenience and the interests of both sides. To safeguard the Revenue, the Court considered it to impose an interim payment condition on the association members, while making clear that the arrangement was only temporary and that non-compliance would automatically discharge the protection.

Outcome: No final adjudication was made on the vires of the rule. The writ appeals were disposed of with an interim conditional arrangement, and the parties were left free to seek early disposal before the learned single Judge after compliance.

---