They have plants for processing frozen food at Madras, Tuticorin, Calcutta and Vishakhapatnam they also have solvent extraction and Industrial Oil plants.
Ashok H. Desai, S.S. Ray, A.N. Banatwala, G.E. Vehanvati, B R. Agarwala, P.G. Gokhale, M.M. Jayakar, V.K. Chittre, R.H. Rancholi, M. Jayakar A. Subba Rao for the Petitioner in WP for Respondent in C.A. No.
274/84.
K Parasaran, Attorney General.
17128 of 1983 from the Judgment and order dated 13th 23rd December, 1983 of the Bombay High Court in Writ Petition No.
M.K. Banerjee, Addl.
CHIEF CONTROLLER OF IMPORTS EXPORTS Issued from file number 3/42/HQ/83/ECA I To say the least and to put it mildly, it is a very odd circular, emanating as it does from a high dignitary of the Government of India.
General, A.K. Ganguli, G. Subramaniam and R.N. Poodar, for the Respondent in T.C. for the Appellants in CA.
They further state that they had number imported any tallow after July, 1982.
sd P. SHARMA DY.
Why the secrecy and why the instruction to mislead, as it were ?
274 of 1984 from Special Leave Petition No.
We heard Shri Ashok Desai for the Liberty Oil Mills P Ltd. and Shri Soli Sorabji, Shri V.P. Raman and Shri Ram Jethmalani for the interveners.
S. Ray, Ashok H. Desai, Summeet Kachawaha, Rani Karanjawala, Ms. M. Karanjawala, Kuldeep Pablay, A.N. Banathwala, G.E. Vahanvati, Ms.Bina Gupta, Rainu Walia, T.M. Ansari and D.N. Misra for the Interveners.
274 of 1984.
And, on 7th, 9th and 10th November and 17th and 21st December, five circulars, styled abeyance circulars and marked secret were issued by the Deputy Chief Controller of Imports and Exports, in respect of as many as 192 companycerns business houses , directing licensing authorities to keep in abeyance for a period of six months from the respective dates of the circulars any application received from any of them for the grant of import licence or Customs clearance Permits and allotment of imported.
The receipt of this circular may please be acknowledge in the standard proforma.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by CHINNAPPA REDDY, J. A few months ago, orthodox Hindu sentiment was outraged and general public feeling was roused by the discovery that beef tallow.
Licenses were number granted.
They claim that they require a companytinuous and steady flow of various imported goods for their several Industrial activities.
Liberty Oil Mills P Ltd. was one of those who filed such a Writ Petition in the Bombay High Court.
imported from abroad was either being sold as vanaspati or used in its manufacture by certain unscrupulous persons.
of India Ltd. or any other similar agency SI.
There was a furore in the companyntry.
The circulars also came to be acted upon.
Allotments were number made.
There was public agitation.
goods through agencies like the State Trading Corporation of India Limited, the Minerals and Metals Trading Corporation of India Ltd or any other similar agency.
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION Transferred Case No.
There was never any allegation against the petitioners that any portion of the tallow imported by them had ever been diverted for the adulteration of vanaspati.
Whereas investigation into certain allegation mentioned under Cl.
Several persons against whom abeyance orders had been made filed Writ Petitions in different High Courts challenging those orders.
22 of 1984.
Thereafter the tallow as subjected to air treatment and sold to soap manufacturers and fatty acid plants.
Arising out of Civil Appeal No.
They state that they have never adulterated the vanaspati manufactured in their factory at Shahpur and that the samples taken from their factory on as many as thirty six occasions had never been found to companytain any type of animal tallow.
They allege that if import licences for which they have applied are number granted to them and if the imported goods for which they have applied are number allotted to them, their factories and their plants will have to be closed down, their business will be seriously affected and many of their employees will be thrown out of employment.
The tallow so purchased was air treated by them in their premises at Kurla and sold by them to soap manufacturers and other fatty acid plants.
Of India Ltd. Minerals and Metals Trading Corpn.
Customs Clearance Permits were number issued.
except for the allegations against them.
The case has been withdrawn to this Court under Art 139A of the Constitution and it is this case that has been heard by us.
Only these applications may be kept in abeyance where the party is entitled to licences or Customs Clearance Permits etc.
They claim to have a factory refining Vegetable oil at Kurla and a factory for manufacturing vanaspati at Shahpur.
Name address Name address of Name of the Prop./ No.
28/83 84/HQ.
We heard Shri Milon Banerjea, Addl.
2855 of 1983.
Such tallow as was imported by them before July, 1982 was sold to them by other licencees to them as actual users.
Solicitor Generalably assisted by Sri Gopala Subrahmanyam for the Union of India and the Chief Controller and Deputy Chief Controller of Imports and Exports and Shri M.C. Bhandare and Shri A. Subba Rao for the State Trading Corporation.
8 of the Imports Control order, 1955 are pending against the under mentioned companycerns, all the licensing authorities are hereby requested to keep in abeyance for six months from the date of issue of this circular any application received from them for the grant of import licence of Customs Clearance Permit and allotment of imported goods through agencies like the State Trading Corpn.
Full details of all applications kept in abeyance as a result of the above instructions may be reported to the Headquarters.
The import of tallow was on the strength of letters of authority issued by licences in respect of additional licences and, replenishment licences and, replenishment licences held by them.
Thereafter the Deputy Chief Controller of Imports and Exports, the files show, companysidered the cases of 61 companycerns including that of Liberty Oil Mills Limited and issued the abeyance circular dated November 9, 1983.
the additional licences had been issued prior to June 5, 1981 and import of OGL items was permitted against the said licences.
Liberty Oil Mills therefore, claim that there was numberjustification what for making an order under clause 8B against them.
