Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

6. In the affidavit in reply that has been filed by Deputy Director General of Foreign Trade the rationale for the notification has been set out. According to the Respondents, the provisions of the earlier notification dated 21 December 2004 were being misinterpreted to mean that only a meat processing plant was required to be registered with APEDA and not an abattoir. This would result in a situation wherein an exporter would furnish to the Customs at the time of export only a certificate to the effect that the meat has been obtained / sourced from an abattoir even though such an abattoir is not registered with APEDA. This, it has been stated in the reply, had resulted in illegal and unauthorised slaughter of animals Dmt 9 wp9043-11 since the meat for export can be sourced from any abattoir without the requirement of the abattoir being registered with APEDA being fulfilled. The practice in trade, it is stated, is that an animal is slaughtered in an abattoir (most abattoirs being municipal abattoirs) and the carcass is taken to a meat processing plant, generally private, for further processing. In certain cases, the abattoir is attached to its own meat processing plant, this being referred to as integrated abattoir.

Presently it is stated, most of the processing plants are procuring carcasses from municipal abattoirs over which APEDA has no control. If the animal is slaughtered at a non-

registered abattoir, any defect in quality or any bacterial contamination of the meat cannot be attended to subsequently at the meat processing plant, even though the meat processing plant may be registered with APEDA. An animal slaughtered at a non-registered abattoir may be contaminated and infected with bacteria and pollutants. It is, therefore, submitted that the requirement of APEDA certification / registration will ensure that abattoirs, most of which are municipal, will have Dmt 10 wp9043-11 to maintain standards of hygiene, safety and cleanliness and ensure compliance with the standards prescribed by the Bureau of Indian Standards and the Export of Raw Meat Rules.

7. We do not find any merit in the challenge to the validity of the notification. The earlier notification dated 21 December 2004 stipulated that the export of meat and meat products would be allowed subject to the exporter furnishing a Dmt 11 wp9043-11 certificate to the customs at the time of export, that the items of export have been obtained / sourced from an abattoir / meat processing plant registered with APEDA. The intention of the notification, in our view, is clear. The Certificate which was required to be furnished to Customs would require the exporter to establish that the meat which was under export had been obtained/sourced from an abattoir and from a meat processing plant registered with the APEDA. The use of the expression "abattoir / meat processing plant" would not be susceptible of the interpretation that either the abattoir or the meat processing plant were registered with APEDA. Such a construction would defeat the very purpose and object of the notification which was to ensure that export goods pertaining to meat were of requisite quality. As a matter of fact, as noted earlier, an applicant for registration of an abattoir/ meat processing plant, was required to make a disclosure in Form II of the forms appended to the notification dated 3 March 2009.

8. The present notification dated 31 October 2011 is clarificatory. The notification now sets at rest an element of doubt which arose under the earlier notification as to whether it was sufficient if the meat processing plant alone was registered with APEDA or whether in addition the raw-material had to be sourced from an APEDA registered integrated abattoir/abattoir. Under the present notification, both the meat processing plant and the place wherefrom the meat is sourced as a raw-material have to be duly registered with APEDA. This was the intendment of the earlier notification dated 21 December 2004. Moreover, the notification has a nexus with the object sought to be achieved which is to ensure that the quality of the meat exports conforms to basic conditions of hygiene and quality. No discrimination is made by the notification. Whether the meat processing plant has Dmt 13 wp9043-11 an integrated abattoir or is only a stand alone meat processing plant, does not make any difference to the applicability of the notification. In the case of both, a registration is required with APEDA. Moreover, the place from which the raw material is sourced is also required to be registered with APEDA. In our view, the Union Government was not acting ultra vires its statutory powers when it imposed these restrictions. These restrictions were as a matter of fact in existence since 2004 and the notification of 31 October 2011 is clarificatory to set the matter beyond any doubt. The fundamental right of carrying out business under Article 19 (1)