TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (8) TMI 663
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 10007 of 2019, 3349 of 2019, 5964 of 2019, 1347 of 2022, 1310 of 2022, 1312 of 2022, 1396 of 2022, 1364 of 2022, 1389, 1291, 4615, 4737, 8073, 8085, 8258, 10016 of 2022 HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA ANSHUL JAIN WITH MR LOVE R SHARMA, MR HARSHIT TOLIA WITH MR TEJAS TRIVEDI, MR KUNAL R. DESAI, MR YJ PATEL AND MR JIGNESHKUMAR P PANDAV FOR THE PETITIONER MR. PARTH H BHATT, MR DEVANG VYAS, ASG FOR THE RESPONDENT JUDGMENT 1. Since the captioned writ petitions are premised on common facts and the issue involved is also common, they are heard and decided analogously by this common judgment and order . FACTS: 2. All the petitioners are dealing with the import of timber wood and have to treat such wood with fumigation process for pest control. The petitioners are constrained to file the present petitions against the action of demand of additional fine/ charge/ penalty 5 times of regular fees by the respondents from the petitioners purportedly under Clause 14 (2) of Chapter VI of the Plant Quarantine Order (Regulation of Import into India), 2003 (hereinafter referred to as 'the PQ Order, 2003). The petitioners also seek to challenge the condition/s imposed by the r....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....pex Court in case of Union Of India vs N.S.Rathnam & Sons, 2015 (10) S.C.C. 681. 6. It is also contended by learned advocate Mr.Raichandani that the respondent no.1 has also issued two office memorandums dated 28.06.2017 and 27.12.2018. It is stated that as per impugned Office Memorandums, the fumigation treatment with Methyl Bromide is given go-bye if the exporting countries have discontinued use of the same for phytosanitary measures. However, the condition no.3 of the impugned Office Memorandum refers that penal fees in respect of those consignments will be charged as prescribed in PQ Order, 2003. 7. While placing reliance on the Regulation 14(2) of PQ Order, 2003, it is contended that the same is in contradistinction with Regulation 9 since the said Regulation 9 permits fumigation with any other equivalent chemical and relaxation is also conferred vide Memorandum 28.06.2017 for import of commodities from such countries which certify discontinuance of use of Methyl Bromide. It is submitted that the petitioners are issued phytosanitory certificates by exporting countries which undertake fumigation by any other equivalent agent to Methyl Bromide, hence the petitioners cannot....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....contravention of Montreal Protocol (UNEP report) must be struck down. 12. Learned Advocate Mr.Tolia appearing for some of the petitioners has submitted that the impugned action of the respondents is violative of Article 51 (c) and 253 of the Constitution of India. It is submitted that it is an international obligation not to create any technical barriers which affect free trade. It is submitted that the International Plant Protection Convention, 1997 was executed by the member countries of the World Trade Organization for the purpose of providing common and effective action to prevent the spread and introduction of pests of plants and products. It is submitted that though it was decided by all of the countries of UN to phase out Methyl Bromide in UNEP (United Nations Environmental Program), the respondents, under the guise of Regulation 14 of PQ Order, permitted local fumigation by Mehtyl Bromide but with a penalty/fine of five times inception charges which is arbitrary and unreasonable. SUBMISSIONS OF RESPONDENTS: 13. In response, learned Advocate Mr.Bhatt appearing on behalf of the respondent authority has vehemently opposed the writ petition. It is submitted that the Mo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....trong possibility that the imported timber may carry certain harmful pests which may cause a serious threat to the bio-security of India and, therefore, is mandatorily required to be regulated as per Plant Quarantine Order, 2003. It is submitted that the relaxation fee at five times the normal inspection fee is collected as penalty to discourage the violation of the conditions stipulated in the Plant Quarantine Order and hence the impugned OMs have been passed in order to create a deterrent by enhancing the penalties in import of the commodities in violation of PQ Order. 16. It is submitted that in absence of an order relaxing the condition in Clause-9, the petitioners cannot claim any relaxation in respect of import without fulfilling the stipulated conditions. Hence, it is submitted that the writ petitioners have got no legal right to approach this Court seeking to alter the terms of import and the permit and order, on terms more favorable to them. 17. Learned advocate Mr.Bhatt has submitted that as per PQ Order, 2003, when any consignment of timber / wood is imported in India, the same is inspected by the Plant Protection Officer at Port. If the Timber is fumigated with Me....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....country where the commodity has not been grown or processed to change its nature) when the consignment has not been subjected to the risk of infestation or contamination by pests regulated by the country of destination and meets the phytosanitary import requirements of that country, and the original phytosanitary certificate or a certified copy of the phytosanitary certificate (hereafter referred to as a "certified copy") is available. NPPOs shall use the model phytosanitary certificates of the IPPC. A) ISPM-1 2.13 Dispute settlement Contracting parties should be open to consultation regarding their phytosanitary measures, when requested by other contracting parties. If there is a dispute regarding the interpretation or application of the IPPC or its ISPMs, or if a contracting party considers that an action by another contracting party is in conflict with the obligations of the IPPC or guidance provided in its ISPMs, "the contracting parties concerned shall consult among themselves as soon as possible with a view to resolving the dispute." (Article XIII.1) If the dispute cannot be resolved in this way, then the provisions of Article XIII relating to the settlement....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... such cases, hence the action of the respondent authority is in consonance of the policy of the country and also with the international measures declared by the IPPC. Hence, it is submitted that the writ petitions may be dismissed. CONCLUSION: 21. Succinctly stated the following facts are established from the pleadings: a) All the petitioners are importing timber from the countries after obtaining valid license/permissions from the authorities. b) The petitioners are importing the same with a phytosanitary certificates issued by National Plant Protection Organisation (NPPO) of the exporting country. Such certificates are issued after undertaking necessary fumigation by other equivalent chemical to Methyl Bromide or by Methyl Bromide. c) On arrival of such timber, the respondent authorities after granting relaxation for such import do not accept the phytosanitary certificates issued by the exporting country for the reason that the timber is not fumigated as per the Indian standards. d) They are allowed to import and collect the consignment after the timber is fumigated again as per Indian standards. e) The petitioners pay regular ch....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....charge of the Plant Quarantine Stations for-relaxing the conditions of Import permit and phytosanitary certificate required as per Plant Quarantine (Regulation of Import into India) Order, 2003 as a one-time exception in favour of a single party and not for repeated violations by that party. All second or subsequent cases of violation of requirement of Import Permit and Phytosanitary certificate by any party shall be forwarded to Joint Secretary (Plant Protection), Department of Agriculture & Cooperaton. (2) In the event of grant of relaxation by competent authority, the consignment shall be released after charging the fee for import permit and fee for plant quarantine inspection at five times of normal rates." 24. Pursuant to the aforesaid Plant Quarantine Order (PQ), the respondent authority has issued the OMs dated 28.07.2017, 27.12.2018 and 19.6.2020. These OM's are issued with regard to levy of penalties as prescribed in the PQ Order, 2003. 25. The entire case of the respondent authorities hinges on two aspects (a) in order deter the petitioners from importing timber from such countries which do not meet with the parameters of fumigation as per Indian standards;....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....not yet decided or prescribed under any regulation directing any use of "equivalent chemical" to Methyl Bromide. Thus, the action of the respondents of levy of penal fees in these circumstances appears to be arbitrary. 28. At this stage it would be apposite to refer to the relevant articles of ISPM-12: The requirement of PHYTOSANITARY CERTIFICATION is prescribed in Article 1 of the ISPM-12 which reads as under: "1. Phytosanitary certificates 1.1 Purpose of phytosanitary certificates Phytosanitary certificates are issued to attest that plants, plant products or other regulated articles meet the phytosanitary import requirements of importing countries and are in conformity with the certifying statement. Phytosanitary certificates may also be issued to support re-export certification to other countries. Phytosanitary certificates should be issued only for these purposes. 1.2 Types and forms of phytosanitary certificates In the Annex to the IPPC, there are two types of certificates: a "phytosanitary certificate" (see Annex 1 of this standard) for export purposes and a "phytosanitary certificate for re-export" (see Annex 2 of this standard....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....able, it may require the prompt cooperation of the NPPO of the exporting or re-exporting country in determining the validity or non-validity of the phytosanitary certificates. The NPPO of the exporting or re-exporting country should take corrective action where necessary and review systems for the issuance of phytosanitary certificates so as to ensure that a high level of confidence is associated with its phytosanitary certificates." 29. A plain and simple reading of the aforesaid Articles of the ISPM-12, will clarify that a phytosanitory certificate is required to be issued by the NPPO of the country of origin. As per Article 3 the NPPOs of importing countries may require phytosanitory certificates for regulated articles. In the present cases, timber is recognised as a regulated article. It is also prescribed that for certain plant produces the importing countries should not require such certificate if the products are processed to the point where they have no potential for introducing regulated pest. Article 3 further clarifies that "NPPOs should consult bilaterally when there are differences between their views regarding the technical justification for requiring phytosanitory....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y the test of reasonableness of restriction on free trade as prescribed in clause(6) of Article. 32. Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India guarantees right to practice any profession, occupation or trade or business. However, the freedom is not unrestricted or uncontrolled in view of clause (6) of the article which authorizes the legislation to (a) impose reasonable restrictions on this right in the interest of general public, (b) prescribes technical or professional qualifications necessary for carrying on any profession, trade or business; and (c) enables the state to carry on any trade or business to the exclusion of the private citizens, wholly or partially. The expression 'in the interest of general public' is of wide import comprehending public order, public health, public security, morals, economic welfare of the community and the objects, mentioned in Part-IV of the Constitution. (vide Municipal Corporation Of The City Of Ahmedabad vs. Jan Mohammed Usmanbhal, 1986 (3) S.C.C. 20). Such expression will encompass the bio-security of the Country which has the direct impact on the environment and public health. 33. While imposing reasonable restrictions, th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... as per Montreal Protocol. Such fumigated products by Methyl Bromide are being exported by India after framing of necessary guidelines being Quarantine Treatment and Application Procedures of Methyl Bromide Fumigation. Thus, the concern of the Indian Government with regard to the affecting of bio-security appears to be well founded, however in wake of no other alternative as on today, the imposition of penalty on the petitioners appear to be harsh. The respondents cannot approbate and reprobate on usage of same chemical by taking shelter under bio-security of country. It is also an undisputed fact that as on today no rules or guidelines or regulations are framed by the Government of India mandating the use of any other chemical except Methyl Bromide for fumigation process. 35. At this stage, I may with profit refer to the few observations made by the Constitution Bench of the Apex Court which will facilitate in understanding the expression "reasonable restrictions." In the case of Cooverjee B.Bharucha vs. Excise Commissioner And The Chief Commissioner, Ajmer , AIR 1954 SC 220 has held thus: "Laws prohibiting trades in noxious or dangerous goods or trafficking in women c....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....India guarantees that all citizens have the right to practise any profession or to carry on any occupation or trade or business and Clause (6) of the article authorises legislation which imposes reasonable restrictions on this right in the interests of the general public. It is not disputed that in order to determine the reasonableness of the restriction regard must be had to the nature of the business and the conditions prevailing in that trade. It is obvious that these factors must differ from trade-to-trade and no absolute or conclusive rules concerning all trades can be prescribed. It can not be denied that the State has the power to prohibit trades which are illegal or immoral or injurious to the health and welfare of the public. It is well settled that the test of reasonableness, wherever prescribed, should be applied to each individual statute, and each case has to be examined on its own facts and generalised standards cannot be adopted. The Court, while examining the purpose of restrictions imposed has to evaluate the extent of evil which is sought to be remedied by imposing such restrictions. The Apex Court has emphasised that phrase "reasonable restriction" connotes that ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nts should not grant any relaxation of import of such timber or if they are allowing the same no penalty should be imposed. Thus, the action of the respondents in levying fine or penalty will amount to reasonable restrictions having direct impact on their right guaranteed under Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India, since the petitioners cannot carry on with their trade unless they pay such fine or penalty. The respondents before imposing fine or penalty should have deliberated on the issue and the adversity faced by the petitioners, since the issuance of phytosanitory certificate is beyond their sphere or ambit. They cannot insist the exporting country to issue phytosanitory certificate as per the requirement of Indian parameters. Without resolving the issue at the ends of NPPOs of each country, the petitioners are being penalised. Thus, such an action of the respondents is arbitrary and invades their right to trade, hence the same calls for interference. 38. Since this Court has held the action of the respondents in levying fine or penalty as arbitrary and violates the fundamental rights, the cardinal question of law which necessitates to be addressed is "whether this ....