- (1.) THE appeal is directed against an order disposing of a writ petition without calling for affidavits and directing an exception to be made out for the Appellant to complete the unexecuted part of an export order.
(2.) THE Union says that the Union should have been invited to use an affidavit to express its version of things. The Union says that the writ petition could not have been disposed of by directly permitting the exporter to complete the alleged export obligations without assessing the facts.
(3.) THE writ Petitioners claim to have obtained orders of export of maize from foreign buyers that had been partly executed prior to a ban on export of maize being imposed till October 15, 2008 by the Appellant. The writ Petitioners say that the export orders have to be executed expeditiously and tons of maize remain stocked and ready for export. The writ Petitioners submit that upon a temporary restriction being imposed by the Government, transitional arrangements have been contemplated both under Clause 1.5 of Foreign Trade Policy of 2004 -2009 and under Clause 2.5 thereof. The writ Petitioners contend that Clause 2.5, which provides for exemption from the policy or procedure, empowers the Director General of Foreign Trade (DGFT) to pass such orders or grant such relaxation or relief as the Director may deem fit on grounds of genuine hardship and adverse impact on trade. It is such argument that found favour with the learned Single Judge as will appear from the order impugned in this appeal.;