Judicial over-reaching

BS OPINION

The Calcutta High Court's directive to the Centre to cancel its July 12, 2002, notification on diluting the mandatory use of jute bags for packing foodgrains and sugar, is replete with ominous portents and should not be allowed to go unchallenged.

For one thing, it is needless judicial interference in policy issues. In fact, another bench of the same court had earlier dismissed a similar writ with the categorical observation that it was a policy matter and, as such, warranted no court intervention.

But now the court has not only asked the Centre to rescind its order but also to issue a fresh order to restore the status quo, which means that all foodgrains and sugar must be packed in gunny bags.

As if that were not bad enough, the court has also observed that the Jute Advisory Committee's recommendation to the government to dilute the original provision was ultra vires of the Constitution.

If that be the case, then even past decisions which exempted, in phases, the cement and fertiliser industries from mandatory packaging in jute bags can also be challenged and will be quashed by the judiciary.

In the case of foodgrains and sugar, too, the government was intending to follow the cement and fertiliser route of phased easing of the packaging norms, leading ultimately to complete exemption from the mandatory jute packaging order. This process has, obviously, suffered a jolt, if not been wholly derailed.

It is time the jute industry realised that retrograde policy options like compulsory jute packaging orders cannot survive for long in a liberalised economic atmosphere.

The industry will have to start preparing for life without such clutches. In any case, in the absence of any monitoring agency, it is difficult to ensure compliance with such stipulations.

Fortunately, jute as a natural fibre has several inherent qualities that can help it thrive as packaging material for a variety of products.

But any judgement with regard to the suitability of the packing material and the right to choose the material needs to be left to the users.

This apart, the research and development efforts that have been undertaken to find new and diversified uses of jute have opened numerous avenues for production of jute products for the domestic as well as export markets.

Jute blends in both the timber and textile sectors have already found a market niche. In fact, new uses of jute farm and factory wastes have also been discovered and even been commercialised, to improve the viability of jute cultivation and the jute industry.

The sooner the jute sector wakes up to this realisation, the better it would be for its own future.

So far as the government is concerned, it should not lose time in getting the Calcutta High Court verdict reviewed by the Supreme Court so as to pave the way for jute sector reforms. If any law needs to be amended for this purpose, it should be done expeditiously.