K. E. CHAUHAN, J.--In exercise of the powers conferred by subsection (1) of section 3 of the Imports and Exports (Control) Act XXXIX of 1950 (hereinafter called the Act, the Central Government issued an Order, dated 31-12-1970, published in the Gazette of Pakistan (Extraordinary), dated 1-1-1971, known as the "Import Policy (January-June 1971), Order." Paragraph 3 of this Order stated that items importable under the "Exports Bonus Scheme" were detailed in the Ministry of Commerce Public Notice No, 2(21)/70-E-VI-58, dated 31st of December 1970. Item No, 145 of the said Public Notice reads as follows:-- "145. Cinematographic films exposed other than films wholly or partly exposed in any Indian or Pakistani language with or without a sound track and all films depicting Indian or Pakistani way of living either silent or dubbed or in which the leading roles have been played by Indian or Pakistani actors or actresses."
2. Later on, by means of two Orders, dated 9-1-1971 and 18-1-1971 (copies filed in this case as Annexs. R/1 and R/2, the Government laid down a detailed Scheme with regard to "The Import of Cinematographic films exposed) under rental arrangements, allowing remittance of rental against surrender of Bonus Voucher", and indicated the terms and conditions in that respect. The petitioner-company who, we are told at the Bar, is a commercial importer, has challenged the last- mentioned orders of the Central Government in its amended writ petition and its learned counsel has raised a number of contentions before us which we will presently dispose of.
3. The first point argued was that the Orders contained in Annexs. R/1 and R/2 are of such a nature as fall under section 3 of the Act, which lays down that such orders should be published in the official Gazette. It was submitted that since these Orders were not published in the official Gazette, therefore, they should be declared to be without lawful authority. It may be that so for the Orders have not appeared in the official Gazette but since the intention of the Government is manifest that it is anxious to put them into operation and a Gazette can be issued any moment, specially, when the apparent tenor of Annexs. R/1 and R/2 itself shows (see para. following condition No, 19 in Annex.
R/1)--that these decisions are to be announced through a public notice, we are not inclined to give effect to this objection in the peculiar circumstances of the present case. That in situations of such types a Court is justified in not issuing a writ merely on such counts, was laid down by their Lordships of the Supreme Court in Sheikh Rehmatullah v. The Deputy Settlement Commissioner and others , where it was held that the Court will not grant a writ to produce a certain effect when the law provides power to one of the parties affected by the writ to nullify the Courts writ unilaterally and circumstances enabling such action or found to be present.
4. The next point argued was that once the item of Cinematographic films (that is Item No, 145 hereinbefore referred to) was placed by "Import Policy Order", in the sphere of "Bonus List" or Export Bonus Scheme", then no further conditions or reservations could be attached to the same. We have not been able to appreciate this contention. If once the power to issue Orders under section 3 is conceded to the Government, then on general principle, as well as on the principle of section 21 of the General Clauses Act, a power to alter, modify or make additions therein shall also have to be accepted. Even otherwise in Para. 10 of the Public Notice bearing No, 326/102/59-E.P. III, dated 15-1- 59, regarding "Export Bonus Scheme", printed in the form of Appendix 17 at page 296 of the "Manual of Imports and Exports Control", it is written that:-- "Government reserve to themselves the right to make changes including additions, deletions and modifications in the Scheme considered necessary from time to time of This will show that mere indication that an item falls under Cash-cum-Bonus List, it does not mean that further provisions regulating its import cannot be made by the Government. A perusal of the various Appendices contained in the "Manual of Imports and Exports Control", show that in spite of various items falling under Bonus List, separate and detailed procedure, rules, regulations, conditions and stipulations about them also exist.
5. It was then argued that the Orders in Annexs. R/1 and R/2 do not possess much merit and are not beneficial to the importers like the petitioners. This Court is not concerned with merits and demerits of a Policy issued under section 3 of the Act, which is the sole privilege of the Government and which cannot be dictated in this respect by any extraneous agency. Learned counsel argued that the result of giving effect to the various stipulations contained in Annexs. R/1 and R/2 will tanta- mount to virtually take Item No, 145 out of the Bonus List and rather make it of the kind of Free List or Licensable List. The contention has no force. Merely because certain strings are attached to an item in the Bonus List, in our opinion, does not mean that the said item goes out of that list. Learned counsel argued that according to new conditions an importer will have to obtain a permit which is not in keeping with the spirit of the Bonus Scheme where only licences are issued. Be that as it may, as already indicated, stipulations of this kind will not make the two Orders of the Central Government as to be without lawful authority.
The next point argued was that the Orders contained in Annexs. R/1 and R/2, are mala fide, inasmuch as, they will help only a few persons, and the plea of the Department, as taken in the written comments that they were broad-based, is not correct. We have already observed that we are not concerned with this aspect of the matter and merely because the petitioner-company has doubts about the ultimate benefits or utility of the Scheme or Policy contained in Annexs. R/1 and R/2, is no ground to attribute mala fides to the Government.
7. The last point argued was that on the construction of the Orders contained in Annexs. R/1 and R/2, the new-comers, as a class, cannot be given more than ten films on the whole, whereas in the1 comments, submitted to this Court, the Government has indicated that what the Orders mean is that each individual new-comer will be eligible to get ten films if he fulfils the requisite conditions in that respect. Learned counsel submits that this deparmental construction is not correct. We have no intention to enter into this controversy at this stage because as yet no applications have been invited and no formal licences (as we were told by the learned counsel himself), have been issued to any new-corner. The petitioner-company will have (if in any relevant context where it is an aggrieved party), the departmental remedies of appeal, representation and revision under the relevant law and from that point of view as well no occasion exists for us to solve this controversy in a purely academic form.
8. No other point was argued before us.
9. The upshot of the above discussion is that this writ petition has no merits and is dismissed in limine. PLD 1963 SC 633