Bicrampore Tea Estate Vs the Union of India and 3 Ors.

2:THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY GOVT. OF ASSAM INDUSTRY AND COMMERCE DEPARTMENT AND CHAIRMAN OF STATE LEVEL COMMITTEE.

¶12

3:THE DIRECTOR INDUSTRIES AND COMMERCE DEPTT. GOVT. OF ASSAM BAMUNIMAIDAM GHY ASSAM

¶13

4:GENERAL MANAGER DISTRICT INDUSTRIES AND COMMERCE CENTRE CACHAR SILCHA

¶14

Advocate for the Petitioner : MS N SAIKIA, R BARMAN

¶15

Advocate for the Respondent : DY.S.G.I., SC, INDUSTRIES AND COMMERCE

¶16

Page No.# 2/3

¶17

BEFORE

¶18

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE LANUSUNGKUM JAMIR O R D E R

¶19

05.02.2025

¶20

Heard Ms. N. Saikia, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. K. Gogoi, learned CGC for the respondent No.1 and Mr. A. Kalita, learned Standing Counsel, Industries and Commerce, for the respondent Nos. 2, 3 and 4.

¶21

By this writ petition, the petitioner is praying for a direction to the respondent authorities to grant 30% of the Central Capital Investment Subsidy entitled to the petitioner in terms of the Central Capital Investment Subsidy Scheme, 2007. It is also the case of the petitioner that the General Manager, DICC, Cachar, Silchar by a communication dated 14.08.2014 had recommended the case of the petitioner for receiving the subsidy. Thereafter, certain documents were found to be required for considering the case of the petitioner to get the subsidy and accordingly the petitioner’s unit was informed on 07.10.2016 to submit the shortfall documents.

¶22

In response to the said letter, the petitioner’s unit submitted all the requisite documents before the Additional Director (H&BV) on 13.10.2016. However, the State Level Committee (SLC in short) in its meeting held on 28.07.2023, rejected the case of the petitioner for want of all the documents which is mentioned in the minutes of the SLC meeting.

¶23

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner may be given an opportunity to submit all the documents mentioned in the minutes of the SLC meeting which was held on 28.07.2023.

¶24

Mr. A. Kalita, learned Standing Counsel, Industries and Commerce submits

¶25

Page No.# 3/3

¶26

that if the petitioner’s unit furnishes all the required documents as indicated in the SLC meeting minutes held on 28.07.2023, the SLC would consider the case of the petitioner with regard to the grant of subsidy to the petitioner’s unit. However, such documents should be furnished to the concerned General Manager within a period of one week from today. Thereafter, the General Manager will take all steps for placing the case of the petitioner’s unit before the SLC.

¶27

Recording the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties, this writ petition is disposed of directing the petitioner’s unit to place all the required documents indicated in the SLC meeting minutes held on 28.07.2023 before the General Manager, DICC, Cachar, Silchar/respondent No.4 within a period of one week from today. Thereafter, the respondent No.4 shall forthwith take steps to place the case of the petitioner’s unit before the SLC. The SLC shall thereafter consider the case of the petitioner with regard to the entitlement of the 30% subsidy in terms of the relevant guidelines.

¶28

Let such steps be completed within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of the order of this Court.

¶29

With the above observations and directions, this writ petition stands disposed of.

¶30

JUDGE

¶31

Comparing Assistant

Bicrampore Tea Estate v. the Union of India and 3 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bicrampore Tea Estate v. the Union of India and 3 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S Manas Enterprise Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

M/S Pathik Enterprise Vs the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Khargeswar Boro and Anr. Vs the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Gautam Dutta and 11 Ors. Vs the Assam Pharmacy Council and 5 Ors.

Abi Chandra Sarmah Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Shyamal Chandra Pandit Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors.