Delegated Legislation Becomes Enforceable Only Upon Gazette Publication: “Date of Notification” Means Date of Official Publication

Held: The Supreme Court held that a Notification issued under Section 3 of the Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Act, 1992 acquires the force of law only upon its publication in the Official Gazette, and therefore the expression “date of this Notification” must necessarily mean the date of its Gazette publication. An uploaded but unpublished Notification has no legal enforceability, and transitional protection under para 1.05(b) of the Foreign Trade Policy cannot be denied on the basis of pre-publication website upload.

Summary: The appellants, engaged in import of steel products, entered into firm contracts between 29.01.2016 and 04.02.2016 and opened irrevocable Letters of Credit on 05.02.2016. On the same date, the Directorate General of Foreign Trade uploaded a Notification introducing Minimum Import Price (MIP) on certain steel products, though it was officially published in the Gazette only on 11.02.2016. The High Court held that while the Notification operated from 11.02.2016, uploading on 05.02.2016 constituted sufficient notice to bind importers who had not opened Letters of Credit before that date. Before the Supreme Court, the central issue was whether “date of this Notification” in para 2 could refer to a date earlier than Gazette publication. The Court examined Section 3 of the parent Act, which mandates publication in the Official Gazette, and relied upon settled jurisprudence including B.K. Srinivasan and Harlal v. State of Rajasthan to reiterate that publication is a condition precedent to enforceability of delegated legislation. It emphasized that delegated legislation cannot impose burdens unless promulgated in the statutorily prescribed manner and that publication transforms executive intent into binding law.

Decision: The Supreme Court allowed the appeals, quashed the High Court’s judgment dated 21.12.2018, and held that the Notification became operative only on 11.02.2016, the date of its publication in the Official Gazette. The appellants, having opened irrevocable Letters of Credit prior to 11.02.2016 and complied with para 1.05(b) of the Foreign Trade Policy, were held entitled to transitional protection. There was no order as to costs.