R.M. Dhariwal 100% EOU v. Union of India: Legal Analysis of Plastic Waste Management Exemption

This case involves R.M. Dhariwal 100% EOU, who filed a writ petition before the Supreme Court seeking exemption from the Plastic Wastes (Management and Handling) Rules, 2011, to export its products—Pan Masala, Gutkha, and Tobacco—in multilayered plastic sachets. The petition seeks to address whether the petitioner is entitled to the same exemptions that were granted to other similarly situated parties in previous cases. The Court, in its analysis, takes into account earlier rulings and the undertakings provided by the petitioners. The judgment explores the interplay between environmental regulations and export-oriented business operations, offering insights into judicial approaches in balancing these interests.

Introduction:

The petitioner, R.M. Dhariwal 100% EOU, is involved in the export of Pan Masala, Gutkha, and Tobacco. These products are packaged in multilayered plastic sachets, which are subject to the Plastic Wastes (Management and Handling) Rules, 2011. The petitioner approached the Supreme Court for exemption from these rules, as it sought to continue its export operations without being bound by the restrictions on the use of plastic. The petitioner’s claim is based on a precedent set by previous cases, notably Baba Global Ltd. and Harsh International, where similar exemptions were granted under specific conditions.

Petitioner’s Arguments:

The petitioner argues that the exemption under Rule 2 of the Plastic Wastes (Management & Handling) Rules, 2011, should apply to their business operations, allowing them to export products in multilayered plastic packaging. The petitioner highlights that in similar cases, such as Baba Global Ltd., the Court had granted exemptions under the same rules, acknowledging the uniqueness of export-oriented units. The petitioner also submits an undertaking, assuring the Court that no part of the production would be sold in the local market in India. By drawing parallels with the earlier case, the petitioner requests the same exemption to be applied to their operations.

Respondent’s Arguments:

The Union of India, represented by the Ministry of Environment and Forest, argues against granting the exemption. They contend that the exemption provided under the Plastic Wastes Rules cannot be extended simply on the grounds of parity with previous cases. The respondent submits that the petitioner’s undertaking is insufficient to meet the legal requirements, pointing to the need for more comprehensive measures to comply with environmental protection standards. Furthermore, the respondent challenges the earlier exemptions granted, arguing that such decisions were not based on the proper legal framework.

The Court’s Analysis:

The Supreme Court, in its judgment, reviews the earlier decisions in the Baba Global Ltd. and Harsh International cases. The Court notes that in both cases, exemptions were granted on the basis of undertakings provided by the petitioners, ensuring that the products would not be sold within India and that the environmental concerns would be addressed. In this context, the Court emphasizes the importance of maintaining parity and consistency in judicial decisions. The Court acknowledges the submissions made by the Union of India but also recognizes the petitioner’s commitment to adhering to the terms outlined in the undertaking. The Court finds that the petitioner’s case is materially identical to the earlier cases and, therefore, grants the exemption requested by the petitioner.

Conclusion:

The Supreme Court allows the writ petition, confirming the order passed on 13.10.2015, which exempts the petitioner from the operation of the Plastic Wastes (Management & Handling) Rules, 2011, during the pendency of the case. The exemption is granted on the condition that the petitioner strictly adheres to the terms of the undertaking, which includes ensuring that no part of the products will be sold or released in the local market. The case highlights the Court’s approach to balancing environmental regulations with the interests of export-oriented businesses, providing a legal precedent for similar cases in the future.

Don’t miss out on the full details! Download the complete judgment in PDF format below and gain valuable insights instantly!

Download Judgment: R.M. Dhariwal 100% E vs Union of India Supreme Court of India Judgment Dated 18-07-2016-1741873312267.pdf