DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF FOREIGN TRADE & ORS ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Tushar Mehta, Ld. ASG, Mr. Anurag Ahluwalia, CGSC, Ms. Tejaswita Sachdeva, Adv. with Mr. N.P. Puranik, Representative, Ms. Shipika Gandhi, Representative,Mr. Subhash, Representative. Mr. Nikhil Mundeja, Adv. for IOCL. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT 1. The present appeal impugns the findings and judgment of a learned single judge, rejecting a writ petition preferred by M/s Cairns (now succeeded by Vedanta Ltd, hereafter called "Vedanta"). Vedanta sought a direction to the Director General, Foreign Trade (hereafter "DGFT") to itself regarding the necessary permissions/approvals/authorisations for direct export or in the alternative, permission/facilitation for canalised export through the third respondent (hereafter "IOL") of its share of crude oil extracted from the Rajasthan Block RJ0N90/1 (for short "Rajasthan Block"), to the extent not lifted by the W.P.(C)No.9673/2017 Page 1 of 29 second respondent (Union Petroleum Ministryhereafter "UOI") or its nominee Public Sector Undertakings (for short "PSUs"). 2. Vedanta had alleged that it invested more than thirty thousand crores rupees in the Rajasthan Block and have brought world class technology to India. According to it, approximately sixty to seventy per cent of the price realized from the Rajasthan Block production of crude oil production flows back to the public exchequer in the form of profit petroleum, inter alia through a share of the Government's nominee, royalty (paid to the State Government) and cess. It claimed that every additional US$ 1 per barrel of Rajasthan Block Crude Oil realized would fetch the public exchequer an additional US$ 41 million/` 258 crores (` 63/ per US$) on account of the Union's share of profit from petroleum, share of its nominee, royalty and cess. 3. Vedanta claimed that the Central Government‟s Foreign trade policy permits canalized export of crude oil through IOL or direct export with the approval of DGFT. In this respect Sr. No. 113 of Chapter 27 of Schedule 2 of ITC (HS) Classification of Export and Import was cited to say that they provide for the procedure for export of crude oil and it is permissible to export the crude oil. Consequently, Vedanta claimed an entitlement to export; the writ petition claimed directions to enforce that right. 4. The brief facts are that on 15.05.1995 a "Production Sharing Contract ("PSC") was executed between the Union, the Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Ltd. ("ONGC") and Shell India Production Development NV ("Shell"), for the Rajasthan Block. On various dates between 1999 and 2003, Cairn Energy India Pty. Ltd. ("CEIL") acquired 50% of Shell's interest in the PSC, followed by Cairn Energy Hydrocarbons Ltd.("CEHL") acquiring the remaining 50% of Shell's interest in the PSC. Commercial Discovery, in relation to the Rajasthan Block, occurred on 15.09.2004, and Commercial Production began in 2009. The Rajasthan Block Crude Oil is waxy highly paraffinic, with low Sulphur content. W.P.(C)No.9673/2017 Page 2 of 29 Not many refineries in India (whether public sector or private sector) possess requisite refining capability. In these circumstances, its best potential lay in securing a price in the international market, which had a ready requirement for such crude oil. During September 2005, MRPL, a subsidiary of ONGC, was designated as the Union's Nominee to lift the entire crude oil from the Rajasthan Block. MRPL declined to offtake the entire volume. No agreement could be reached on the crude oil price, in view of heavy discounts sought by MRPL on account of transportation costs. Accordingly, a cost benefit analysis was done regarding shifting of the Delivery Point, leading to nominating other Public Sector Undertaking ("PSU") refineries, so that the entire quantit