.
Plastic Waste Rules & 100% EOUs: Supreme Court 2016 in R.M. Dhariwal vs UOIExempts Export Units From Plastic Waste Rules 2011. The Supreme Court in R.M.Dhariwal 100% EOU vs Union Of India & Ors allowed writ petition filed by 100% ExportOriented Unit manufacturing Pan Masala, Gutkha and Tobacco. The Court on18.07.2016 confirmed interim order dated 13.10.2015 exempting petitioner fromoperation of Plastic Waste (Management & Handling) Rules, 2011. The Court held thatRules 5(d) and 5(g) cannot apply to multilayered plastic sachets used for export. TheCourt followed parity with Baba Global Ltd and Harsh International. This blog explainsR.M. Dhariwal on plastic waste, EPA 1986, and exemption for export units.Facts: Challenge To Plastic Waste Rules 2011; Export Of Pan Masala In PlasticSachets. Petitioner is 100% EOU exporting Pan Masala, Gutkha and Tobacco inmultilayered plastic sachets globally. Petitioner challenged Plastic Waste Management& Handling Rules 2011 notification dated 02.07.2011.The Supreme Court in R.M.Dhariwal para 1: Prayers were to:
Get exemption under Rule 2 of 2011 Rules for export packaging
(ii) Quash Rule 5(d) and 5(g) of 2011 Rules
(iii) Declare Rules violative of Article 14, 19(1)(g) and ultra vires EPA 1986Rule 5(d)and 5(g) of 2011 Rules prohibit manufacture, sale and use of multilayered plastic forpackaging gutkha, tobacco and pan masala.The Supreme Court in R.M. Dhariwal para 2:
Cited earlier order in Baba Global Ltd vs UOI WP 466/2011 disposed on 03.09.2013.
Inthat case ASG had stated 100% EOU would be exempted. Similar order in HarshInternational vs UOI on 06.12.2013.A common mistake is applying domestic wasterules to export goods. R.M. Dhariwal says export units need parity.
EPA 1986 & Plastic Waste Rules 2011: Scope And Exemption. The Supreme Courtin R.M. Dhariwal noted 2011 Rules were framed under Environment Protection Act 1986to manage plastic waste generated in India.The Supreme Court in R.M. Dhariwal para 2:"We think it is imperative to impart parity to all the Writ Petitioners before us". SinceBaba Global and Harsh International got exemption, R.M. Dhariwal also entitled.TheSupreme Court in R.M. Dhariwal para 4: Union of India filed review against Baba Globalorder but review was dismissed on 14.01.2016.The Supreme Court in R.M. Dhariwalpara 5: Confirmed order dated 13.10.2015 and allowed writ "in terms of the order inBaba Global Ltd".Key condition: Exemption subject to Undertaking dated 28.07.2015that "no part of production would be sold or released in local market in India".In ourexperience, MoEF cannot extend domestic waste rules to goods never entering Indianmarket. For EOUs, export packaging is outside scope.Article 19(1)(g) & Article 14: Business Freedom For Exporters. Petitioner arguedRules 5(d) and 5(g) violate right to trade and equality.The Supreme Court in R.M.Dhariwal did not strike down Rules. Instead granted exemption based on parity andundertaking.The Supreme Court in R.M. Dhariwal: Implied that applying domestic wastemanagement rules to export-only production is arbitrary under Article 14.Lesson forEOUs: File undertaking that 100% goods are exported. For MoEF: Rules must distinguishbetween domestic and export waste.
Conclusion
R.M. Dhariwal 100% EOU vs UOI establishes that plastic waste management rules2011 supreme court 2016 jurisprudence carves exemption for export units. SupremeCourt 18.07.2016 held 100% EOUs exporting in multilayered plastic not covered by 2011Rules. Court followed Baba Global and Harsh International for parity. As the law stands,Plastic Waste Rules apply to domestic market only. For tobacco/pan masala exporters,this judgment is key on compliance. The Supreme Court’s ruling in R.M. Dhariwalbalances environment protection with export promotion
