IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL NO.148 OF 2010 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No.11825 of 2009)

M/s. Frost International Limited           ...Appellant(s)

Versus

Union of India & Ors.                    ...Respondent(s)

O  R  D  E  R

Heard learned counsel on both sides.

Leave granted.

Normally, this Court does not interfere with the  

impugned orders.

Learned Solicitor General, however, in his usual  

fairness, points out that, in this particular case, the  

High Court needs to consider the scope and applicability  

of the Regulations dated 16th March, 2009 [notified on 17th  

March, 2009], Guidelines dated 24th January, 1992, Board's  

Circular  dated  26th June,  2002,  as  also  Notification  

No.16/2005 dated 30th December, 2005.  We may also state  

that these documents were not placed before the High Court  

when the impugned order came to be passed.    The High  

Court  will  also  consider  whether  the  Regulations  have  

retrospective  effect  so  as  to  cover  the  facts  of  this  

case.

...2/-

- 2 -  

As regards Notification No.16/2005, learned counsel  

for the Mumbai Port Trust [Respondent No.5] states that  

the said notification has no application to the present  

case because it applies to Jawaharlal Nehru Port Trust,  

which  is  not  concerned  with  the  controversy  herein,  

particularly, because, in this case, we are concerned with  

Mumbai Port Trust for which there is no such notification.

Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and  

the  matter  is  remitted  to  the  High  Court  for  de  novo  

consideration in accordance with law.  If the High Court  

so deems fit, it can even take up the writ petition for  

final hearing.

The civil appeal stands, accordingly, allowed of  

with no order as to costs.

......................J.            [S.H. KAPADIA]

......................J.            [SWATANTER KUMAR]

New Delhi, January 11, 2010.