Patna High Court
M/S Maha Shakti Cement Industries ... vs The State Of Bihar on 10 March, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.2532 of 2022
======================================================
M/s Maha Shakti Cement Industries Private Limited, a Company Registered
Under the Companies Act, 2013 Having its Office at Ward No.16, Lohapatti,
PS and District-Madhubani, BIhar through its Authorized Representative-
Bijay Kumar Pradhan, Son of Bharat Pradhan aged about 54 Years (Male),
Resident of Ward NO. 16, Lohapatti, PS and District-Madhubani, Bihar.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, Patna.
2. The Principal Secretary, Department of Industry, Government of Bihar,
Patna.
3. Commissioner-Cum-Secretary, Department of State Taxes, Government of
Bihar, Patna.
4. Director, Industries, Department of Industry, Government of Bihar, Patna.
5. The Director (Technical Development) Department of Industry, Government
of Bihar.
6. The General Manager, District Industries Centre, Madhubani,
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Brisketu Sharan Pandey, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Vikash Kumar, SC-11
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. KUMAR
ORAL JUDGMENT
(Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE)
Date : 10-03-2022
Petitioner has prayed for the following relief(s):
"i. For issuing a writ of mandamus or any other
appropriate writ directing the Respondent
Authorities to implement the Bihar Industrial
Incentive Policy, 2011 (hereinafter refer to as
'Policy') and thereby pay the reimbursement
and subsidy amount as per the entitlement of the
Patna High Court CWJC No.2532 of 2022 dt.10-03-2022
petitioner under the head of Capital Subsidy of
Plant and Machinery.
ii. For issuing appropriate writ
declaring that the payments to the petitioner as
per entitlement for post-production incentives as
provided for in the Policy cannot be kept
pending or denied and has to be timely paid to
Petitioner.
iii. For issuing a writ of certiorari or
any other appropriate writ for quashing the letter
dated 13.10.2017 wherein the Petitioner's claim
for subsidy/reimbursement was denied by the
Respondents on the ground that the petitioner's
proposal does not have approval from the
Competent Authority and the same was not
reconsidered ignoring the fact that the law has
been settled in this regard by the Hon'ble
Division Bench of this High Court (and has been
confirmed by Hon'ble Supreme Court) that there
is no need of any further approval when the
proposal has been given approval by the State
Industrial Promotion Board (SIPB).
iv. For holding that Respondents
erred in not releasing the subsidy/reimbursement
on the ground that the proposal of the
'Competent Authority' given the fact that the
proposal already has approval from SIPB (State
Investment Promotion Board) and the law has
been settled in this regard by the Hon'ble
Division Bench of this High Court and has been
confirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court that
once the proposal has been approved by the
Patna High Court CWJC No.2532 of 2022 dt.10-03-2022
SIPB, no other approval is required.
v. For holding that the Respondents
cannot withhold/discontinue to subsidize and/or
reimbursement the entitlements accorded to the
Petitioner under the Bihar Industrial Incentive
Policy, 2011.
vi. For holding that once the proposal
of the investment has been accepted and
petitioner is declared entitled under the Policy
then the Respondents cannot interfere with the
disbursal of the reimbursement/subsidy amount
to the Petitioner.
vii. For holding that the Respondents
erred by not releasing full Reimbursements and
subsides amount given the fact that they hold no
authority to refuse/stop/interfere, once proposal
of investment has been accepted by the State
Investment Promotion Board (SIPB).
viii. For holding that the Respondents
cannot make the petitioner run from pillar to
post for reimbursement/subsidy once it is found
entitled.
ix. For any reliefs,
direction/directions for which the petitioner is
entitled may be given."
Shri Brishketu Sharan Pandey, learned counsel for
the petitioner, states that certain amount in terms of the Bihar
Industrial Incentive Policy, 2011 already stands paid to the
petitioner. As such, petitioner shall be content if the petition is
Patna High Court CWJC No.2532 of 2022 dt.10-03-2022
disposed of with liberty granted to the petitioner to approach the
authority concerned by filing a representation within a period of
four weeks, with a direction to the authority concerned to
consider and decide the same within a period of four weeks
from the date of its presentation.
Prayer allowed.
Without expressing any opinion on merits of the
claim, petition is disposed of with the liberty aforesaid. All
issues on facts and law are left open.
Needless to say that while considering such request,
principles of natural justice shall be followed and due
opportunity of hearing afforded to the parties.
If aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner shall
have liberty to approach this Court by way of separate
petition(s), if so required and desired.
Equally, liberty is reserved to the petitioner to take
recourse to such alternative remedies as are otherwise available
in accordance with law.
We are hopeful that as and when petitioner takes
recourse to such remedies, as are otherwise available in law,
before the appropriate forum, the same shall be dealt with, in
accordance with law and with reasonable dispatch.
Patna High Court CWJC No.2532 of 2022 dt.10-03-2022
The petition stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms.
Interlocutory application(s), if any, shall also stand
disposed of.
(Sanjay Karol, CJ)
( S. Kumar, J)
K.C.Jha/-
AFR/NAFR
CAV DATE
Uploading Date 11.03.2022
Transmission Date
