Disposed

M/S. Ozone Ayurvedics, Unit-Ii v. the State of Assam and 6 Ors.

Gauhati HC12 Sept 2024WP(C)/443/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petitions challenging rejection of Central Capital Investment Subsidy claims under NEIPP-2007 were disposed of after the State undertook to place the petitioners' claims before the next State Level Committee meeting for reconsideration in light of the Centre's instructions dated 17/06/2022.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners' subsidy claims to be reconsidered by the State Level Committee at its next meeting per instructions dated 17/06/2022.

M/S. Ozone Ayurvedics, Unit-Ii Vs the State of… — Writ and Judicial Review | Gauhati HC (2024)

¶1

Page No.# 1/6

¶2

GAHC010012032019

¶3

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

¶4

Case No. : WP(C)/443/2019

¶5

M/S. OZONE AYURVEDICS, UNIT-II

¶6

A FIRM HAVING ITS OFFICE AND FACTORY AT EXPORT PROMITION INDUSTRIAL PARK (EPIP), AMINGAON, NORTH GUWAHATI CIRCLE. DIST. KAMRUP, ASSAM REP. BY SRI DIPAK KUMAR SINGH.

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 6 ORS.

¶9

REP. BY THE COMM. AND SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, DEPTT. OF INDUSTRIES AND COMMERCE, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-781006.

¶10

2:THE COMMISSIONER OF INDUSTRIES AND COMMERCE

¶11

UDYOG BHAWAN BAMUNIMAIDAM GUWAHATI-21 ASSAM.

¶12

3:THE GENERAL MANAGER

¶13

DISTRICT INDUSTRIES CENTRE AND COMMERCE GUWAHATI-781021 ASSAM.

¶14

4:THE NORTH EASTERN DEVELOPMENT FINANCE CORPORATION (NEDFI)

¶15

DISPUR GUWAHATI-781006.

¶16

5:STATE LEVEL COMMITTEE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF INCENTIVES UNDER INDUSTRIAL AND INVESTMENT POLICY

¶17

Page No.# 2/6

¶18

ASSAM

¶19

REP. BY ITS CHAIRMAN AND PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM INDUSTRIES AND COMMERCE DEPTT. DISPUR GUWAHATI-06.

¶20

6:DIRECTOR OF INDUSTRIES AND COMMERCE CENTRE

¶21

KAMRUP GUWAHATI ASSAM.

¶22

7:UNION OF INDIA

¶23

REP. BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF INDIA MINISTRY OF INDUSTRIES AND COMMERCE DEPTT. OF INDUSTRIAL POLICY AND PROMOTION UDYOG BHAWAN NEW DELHI

¶24

Advocate for the Petitioner : MS. M L GOPE, MS. N HAWELIA,MS. N GOGOI,MS. N MECH

¶25

Advocate for the Respondent : SC, INDUSTRIES AND COMMERCE, MR. M DUTTA (R-4),MS N NATH (R-4)

¶26

Linked Case : WP(C)/435/2019

¶27

OZONE PHARMACEUTICALS LTD. A COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THE COMPANIES ACT 1956 READ WITH THE COMPANIES ACT 2013 AND HAVING ITS OFFICE AND FACTORY AT EXPORT PROMOTION INDUSRIAL PARK (EPIP) AMINGAON NORTH GUWAHATI CIRCLE

¶28

DIST. KAMRUP ASSAM REP. BY SRI DIPAK KUMAR SINGH.

¶29

VERSUS

¶30

Page No.# 3/6

¶31

THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 6 ORS.

¶32

REP. BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM

¶33

DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIES AND COMMERCE MINISTRY OF INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI- 781006.

¶34

2:THE COMMISSIONER OF INDUSTRIES AND COMMERCE

¶35

UDYOG BHAWAN BAMUNIMAIDAM GUWAHATI -21 ASSAM 3:THE GENERAL MANAGER

¶36

DIST. INDUSTRIES CENTRE AND COMMERCE GUWAHATI - 781021 ASSAM

¶37

4:THE NORTH EASTERN DEVELOPMENT FINANCE CORPORATION (NEDFI)

¶38

DISPUR

¶39

GUWAHATI - 781006.

¶40

5:STATE LEVEL COMMITTEE

¶41

FOR IPLEMENTATION OF INCENTIVES UNDER INDUSTRIAL AND INVESTMENT POLITY OF ASSAM

¶42

REP. BY ITS CHAIRMAN AND PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM

¶43

INDUSTRIES AND COMMERCE DEPARTMENT

¶44

DISPUR GUWAHATI -6.

¶45

6:DIRECTOR OF INDUSTRIES AND COMMERCE CENTRE

¶46

KAMRUP GUWAHATI ASSAM

¶47

7:UNION OF INDIA

¶48

Page No.# 4/6

¶49

REP. BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF INDIA MINISTRY OF INDUSTRIES AND COMMERCE DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIES POLICY AND PROMOTION UDYOG BHAWAN

¶50

NEW DELHI.

¶51

-----------Advocate for : MS. M L GOPE Advocate for : SC INDUSTRIES AND COMMERCE appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 6 ORS.

¶52

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN DEV CHOUDHURY

¶53

ORDER

¶54

13.09.2024

¶55

Heard Ms. M. L. Gope, learned counsel and Ms. N. Hawelia, leanred counsel for the writ petitioners in WP(C) 443/2019 and WP(C) 435/2019. Also heard Mr. N. Kalita, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Mr. Anjan Kalita, learned Standing Counsel, Industries and Commerce Department, State of Assam, Ms. A. Gayan, learned CGC on behalf of the Union of India and Mr. M. Dutta, learned Standing Counsel, NEDFI has appeared on behalf of the respondent (NEDFI).

¶56

The issue involved in all these writ petitions are common, viz. rejection of the petitioners’ prayer for grant of Central Capital Investment Subsidy under the North East Industrial Promotion Policy-2007 (NEIPP-2007) floated by the Central Government. The application for grant of such subsidy made by all the writ petitioners were earlier considered by the State Level Committee (SLC) headed by the Commissioner and Secretary, Industries and Commerce Department, Government of

¶57

Page No.# 5/6

¶58

Assam and were rejected. Aggrieved by the orders of rejection, these writ petitions have been filed by the respective petitioners. According to the petitioners’ counsel, their clients have been devastated by the ill effects of pandemic COVID-19 and the industries are virtually facing closure. Therefore, unless the prayer for grant of subsidy is considered expeditiously, it would lead to a catastrophic consequences for their enterprises.

¶59

Mr. Kalita, learned Standing Counsel, Industries and Commerce Department, Assam, has responded to the said submission by producing a copy of the written communication dated 17/06/2022 issued by the Under Secretary to the Government of India, Ministry of Commerce and Industries and submits that instructions have been issued by the Central Government to reconsider the claims made by 3 (three) of the writ petitioners, viz. petitioners in WP(C) 3989/2018, WP(C)/3990/2018 and WP(C) 1711/2019 and their cases has already been considered afresh.

¶60

Since the present writ petitioners are also similarly situated having similar grievance, on instructions obtained from the departmental authorities, Mr. Kalita submits that the cases of the writ petitioners will also be considered appropriately by the SLC in its next meeting. If that be so, it would not be necessary for this Court to enter into adjudication of the disputed issues involved in these writ petitions. With the consent of learned counsel for all the sides, I, therefore, dispose of all the writ petitions by providing that the claims of each of the writ petitioners shall be placed before the next meeting of the SLC and thereafter, the same be considered in the light of the instructions issued vide letter dated 17/06/2022 and by keeping in mind the policy objectives.

¶61

Since both the writ petitions are being disposed of on the above mentioned submission of the learned departmental counsel, it is expected that the SLC will revisit/reconsider the claims of the petitioners objectively and consider the reliefs prayed for by the petitioners by adopting a positive approach and take appropriate

¶62

Page No.# 6/6

¶63

decisions in accordance with the policy objectives.

¶64

With the above observations, both the writ petitions stand disposed of.

¶65

JUDGE

¶66

Comparing Assistant

M/S. Ozone Ayurvedics, Unit-Ii v. the State of Assam and 6 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S. Ozone Ayurvedics, Unit-Ii v. the State of Assam and 6 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mrinmoy Mazumder Vs Moloy Bora IAS and 3 Ors.

Muslim Ali Vs the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Mrinmoy Mazumder and Anr. Vs the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Ozone Pharmaceuticals Ltd. Vs the State of Assam and 6 Ors.

Candid Drug Distributors and 2 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Ghoga Lawtola Milan Krishak Co. Operation Society Ltd. Vs Mabdul Ali and 124 Ors.