Supreme Court seeks government’s response on non-basmati rice export ban
The Supreme Court has requested responses from the government, DGFT, and National Cooperative Exports Ltd on Rika Global Impex Ltd.’s plea challenging the bans on non-basmati white rice exports. Rika argues that the notifications, including one from September allowing export only through National Cooperative Exports Ltd., violate the Foreign Trade Policy and public interest. The company, with significant stock procured before the bans, seeks annulment of the notifications and permission to export its rice. The case raises concerns about proportionality and fairness in trade policy.
The Supreme Court requested responses on a plea by Rika Global Impex Ltd. challenging bans on exporting non-basmati white rice. The court will examine claims that notifying restrictions opposed public interest and breached Foreign Trade Policy. The petitioner seeks to annul the notifications and gain export approval for previously acquired rice stock.
iStock The Supreme Court has sought response from the government, the Directorate General of Foreign Trade (DGFT), National Cooperative Exports Ltd and others on a plea challenging validity of two notifications prohibiting the export of non-basmati white rice since July 20.The petitioner, Rika Global Impex Ltd, has also challenged the DGFT’s notification of September last year allowing export of 75,000 MT of non-basmati white rice to the United Arab Emirates only through the National Co-operative Exports Ltd. A Bench led by Justice B.V. Nagarathna also issued notice to the customs department on Rika’s petition alleging that the notifications were “ultra vires” to the Foreign Trade Policy, 2023 and liable to be set aside on account of “doctrine of legitimate expectation.”
Rika Global through its counsel Abhishek A. Rastogi argued that the notifications failed the test of proportionality, and were discriminatory and arbitrary and opposed to the public interest. Besides, the DGFT did not have the power to issue these notifications, it added.Seeking quashing of the notifications issued by the Directorate last year in July and September, the exporter sought directions to the DGFT to consider its applications for the export of white rice 5% silky sortex as part of the 75,000 MT threshold.Rastogi said approximately 1.3 crore kilograms of rice procured by the company prior to the issuance of notification was lying in a warehouse and the latter was unable to fulfill its contractual obligations to export this rice, despite having received payments before the publication of the notification.Rika Global had executed contracts with Greenfield International LLC for the sale of white rice 5% silky sortex and had procured the stock and shifted it to a godown in Gandhi Dham, Gujarat.
In July 2023, the DGFT had prohibited the export of non-basmati white rice, but had relaxed the prohibition in August and permitted the export of specified quantities to countries like Bhutan, Mauritius and Singapore. In September, the Directorate issued a notification permitting exports of non-basmati white rice only through National Co-operative Exports. However, the exporter failed to get any response from the DGFT for limited permission to export the rice under the contracts awarded to it.The prohibition on export of non-Basmati rice has been a subject matter of dispute before various high courts which have taken diverse views on the issue. (You can now subscribe to our Economic Times WhatsApp channel)
Recommended for you
