Steel minimum import price: SC overturns 2018 Delhi High Court order

The Supreme Court has ruled that minimum import price curbs on steel products take effect only from the date of gazette publication, granting relief to importers who entered contracts before the notif

The Supreme Court of India on Tuesday ruled that a government notification imposing a minimum import price (MIP) on certain steel products could acquire legal force only upon its publication in the Official Gazette, and not from the date it was uploaded on a government website. 

Allowing appeals filed by steel importers, a Bench of Justices Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha and Alok Aradhe set aside a 2018 Delhi High Court ruling and held that the MIP notification issued by the Directorate General of Foreign Trade (DGFT) became operative only on February 11, 2016, the date of its gazette publication, and not February 5, 2016, when it was uploaded online.  

The case arose from challenges to a February 2016 notification that introduced a minimum import price on 173 categories of steel products under Chapter 72 of the Foreign Trade Policy (FTP) 2015-20. 

Several importers had entered into firm contracts and opened irrevocable letters of credit with overseas suppliers before February 11, 2016, but after February 5, 2016, when the notification was uploaded on the DGFT website with a note stating it was “to be published” in the Gazette. Though the Delhi High Court had acknowledged that the notification legally operated from February 11, 2016, it nevertheless held that the website upload constituted sufficient notice to bind importers who had not opened letters of credit before February 5, 2016. That reasoning was rejected by the apex court. 

“Law, to bind, must first exist. And to exist, it must be made known in the manner ordained by the legislature,” the Bench said, emphasising that delegated legislation acquires enforceability only upon publication in the Official Gazette, as  required under Section 3 of the Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Act, 1992.  

The court underscored that gazette publication is not a procedural formality but a constitutional requirement that ensures notice, certainty and accountability.  

Uploading a draft or proposed notification on a website, it said, cannot substitute the statutorily mandated mode of promulgation, nor can legal consequences be attached to such an act.

 

Interpreting paragraph 2 of the MIP notification, which exempted imports backed by letters of credit entered into before “the date of this notification”, subject to the FTP’s transitional protection clause, the Bench held that the phrase could only mean the date of gazette publication. Since the importers had opened irrevocable letters of credit prior to February 11, 2016 and complied with the registration requirements under the FTP, they were entitled to protection from the newly imposed import restriction.

 

To hold otherwise, the court warned, would permit unpublished delegated legislation to burden citizens, erode commercial certainty, and undermine the rule of law in an area where predictability is essential for trade and investment decisions.