Suppression Of Material Facts Regarding Criminal Antecedents Disentitles Accused To Discretionary Relief Of Bail: Orissa High Court Section 311 CrPC | Delay Or Absence Of Examination-In-Chief No Bar To Summon Material Witnesses: Allahabad High Court Revenue Authorities Lack Jurisdiction To Declare Genuineness Of Wills Or Validity Of Settlement Deeds; Parties Must Approach Civil Court: Andhra Pradesh High Court Demand Of Bribe Is Sine Qua Non For Conviction Under PC Act, Mere Recovery Of Tainted Money Not Enough: Bombay High Court 'Promotion Effected Long Ago Not To Be Disturbed': Supreme Court Sets Aside HC Order Quashing 13-Year-Old Promotion; Holds 'Laying Rules' Directory Not Mandatory "Mere Oral Assertion Or 'Data Loss' Letter Not Enough To Prove Driving Licence Validity; Owner Has Strict Duty To Ensure Renewal": Supreme Court Reinstates Insurer's Non-Liability, Applies 'Pay & Recover' Principle "Zero Tolerance To Corruption": Supreme Court Reinstates FIRs Against Karnataka Cops, Slams High Court For 'Mini-Trial' & Exceeding S.482 CrPC Powers ‘Ancillary Services Don't Override Carriage’: Supreme Court Upholds 7.5% Presumptive Income For Cruise Operators Under Section 44B IT Act, Rejects Revenue's Higher Tax Claim Division Bench Refuses To Quash FIR, Holds It Cannot Nullify Single Judge's Final Order Directing Registration Of Case: Allahabad High Court High Court Leave Under Clause XII Doesn't Protect Transferred Suits; Section 16 CPC Strictly Applies To City Civil Court In 'Suits For Land': Bombay High Court Joint Account Holder Who Didn't Sign The Dishonoured Cheque Cannot Be Prosecuted Under Section 138 NI Act: Punjab & Haryana High Court Suits Cannot Be Consolidated If Parties, Properties, And Causes Of Action Are Different: Telangana High Court P&H High Court Halts All Construction In Mohali's Shivalik Foothills Over Failure To Demarcate 'Forest Land', Bars Land Sale No Embargo On Issuing Single Statutory Notice Under Section 138 NI Act For Multiple Dishonoured Cheques: Orissa High Court District Collector Has No Jurisdiction Under CrPC To Order Reopening Of Investigation Or Recall Of Closure Report: Madhya Pradesh High Court No Exclusive Monopoly Over Geographical Term 'Malabar' In Isolation; Protection Limited To Registered Composite Marks: Kerala High Court Person In 'De Facto' Control Is A Promoter Under Companies Act Even If Designated As Professional Director: Karnataka High Court Supreme Court Urges Mandatory Animal Tagging, Strict Enforcement of Gaushala Laws To Tackle Stray Cattle Crisis; Holds Owners Accountable "Don't Render Victims Remediless": Supreme Court Slams High Court For Dismissing Plea Over Stray Bull Death, Awards ₹15 Lakh Compensation Supreme Court Red-Flags 'Unregulated Shadow Work' of Private Investigators, Calls For Legislative Overhaul on Digital Evidence & Privacy Rights 125 CrPC | Wife 'Not Entitled To Interim Maintenance If Adultery Established Ex Facie': Supreme Court Evidence Against Absconder Invalid Without Prior S.299 CrPC Order: SC Acquits Murder Accused Ad Valorem Court Fee Mandatory For Section 54 Appeals Challenging Land Acquisition Awards: Supreme Court

Equal Protection of Rights in Export Policy: Strikes Down Export Quota Criteria for Broken Rice Allocation: Delhi High Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a landmark judgment handed down on October 20, 2023, the Delhi High Court has set aside the allocation criteria for the export of broken rice to specific countries, asserting that it violates fundamental principles of fairness and equal protection under the law.

The Court, in its verdict, declared that the policy of allocating quotas for the export of broken rice to certain rice exporters, based on their previous exports to particular countries, lacked a rational nexus to the intended goal of ensuring capacity and quality. Justice Vibhu Bakhru and Justice Amit Mahajan emphasized that the classification of rice exporters into separate categories, which determined their eligibility for export quotas, could not be exempt from judicial scrutiny.

Delhi High Court Stated , "The assumption that the exporters that have exported rice to the given countries in question would have the capacity to do so may not be unfounded. However, the point is not whether the rice exporters that have past experience of exporting to the countries in question would have the capacity to service the export quota; the point is whether such exporters would in any manner hold out a more credible assurance of capacity to service the export orders in comparison with other rice exporters having a similar or higher export turnover but to other countries. If the answer to this is in the negative, then clearly the given classification does not have any nexus with the object of ensuring capacity to service the export orders."

The judgment further underscored the importance of ensuring that classification criteria for allocation of quotas must have a rational nexus to their intended objective. It noted that the policy failed to provide any material or rational basis to support the assumption that past exports to specific countries would guarantee better quality or capacity.

As a result of this ruling, the Delhi High Court directed the authorities to re-evaluate the criteria for the allocation of quotas for the export of broken rice.

This judgment has significant implications for the export policy and allocation criteria of commodities in India, reaffirming the principle that such criteria must be just, reasonable, and founded on a rational basis.

In a statement after the ruling, legal experts praised the decision, noting that it reinforced the principles of fairness and equality under the Indian Constitution and ensured that allocation criteria for critical commodities align with their intended objectives.

Date of Decision: 20 October 2023

ASFIVE AGRO PRIVATE LIMITED & ORS VS UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

[gview file="https://lawyerenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/20-Oct-2023-ASFIVE-AGRO-PRIVATE-LIMITED-Vs-UOI.pdf"]

Latest Legal News