0

The delay in making the application is attributable to the petitioners and the delay could have been avoided had the petitioners been a bit more vigilant and conscious about the terms and conditions of the Scheme under which they sought subsidy: Calcutta High Court.

The judgement in the case of Murlidhar Ratanlal Exports Ltd. & ors. vs State Of West Bengal & Ors (WPO No. 574 of 2017) was served by Hon’ble Justice Amrita Sinha.

FACTS OF THE CASE:
The dispute in the writ petition arises out of a Scheme called ‘The West Bengal State Support for Industries Scheme, 2008’ (‘WBSSIS-2008’ for short). The said Scheme was floated by the Commerce and Industries Department and was specifically meant for extending financial support to industrial projects of large and medium scale units to be set up in the State. The said Scheme dated 26th February, 2009 was published in the Kolkata Gazette, Extraordinary on 26th February, 2009 and was effective from 1st April, 2008 to 31st March, 2013. According to the Scheme a unit in the large and medium scale sector, set up for the purpose of manufacture of goods, having RC issued by the Director of industries is an eligible unit for receiving incentive sanction under the Scheme. As per the Scheme, ‘Fixed Capital Investment’ means investment made in plant and machinery and also equipment installed for pollution control measures of the approved project by the eligible unit made after the date of obtaining RC in part. The petitioners applied for issuance of RC part-II on 3rd October, 2012 and the application was received by the respondent authority on 4th October, 2012. In the said application the date of commissioning the project was mentioned as 1st October, 2012. As the RC part-II was not issued within the time mentioned in the Scheme, the petitioners made several representations for issuance of the same.

JUDGEMENT :
The court after going through the facts and arguments observed that there is absolutely no ambiguity in the provisions of the scheme. The time limits within which applications are to be made for obtaining the different parts of the registration certificate are clearly mentioned. The petitioners themselves are solely responsible for the delay in making such application. Accordingly, the ratio laid down in the judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of Dilip Kumar (supra) and Ramnath & Co. (supra) will not be applicable in the facts and circumstances of the instant case. The order passed by this Hon’ble Court also does not come to the aid of the petitioners as the delay was attributable to the petitioners alone.
In view of the above, no relief can be granted in favour of the petitioners in the instant case. The writ petition fails and is hereby dismissed. No costs. Urgent photostat certified copy of this judgment, if applied for, shall be given to the parties as expeditiously as possible on compliance of all necessary formalities.

JUDGEMENT REVIEWED BY AKANKSHA. 

Click Here To View Judgement

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Open chat