Disposed

Shree Nanak Ferro Alloys Pvt. Ltd. Throughi Ts Director Mehul Basant v. the State of Jharkhand through the Secretary Department of Industries

Jharkhand HC11 Jun 2019WPC/2370/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Jharkhand disposed of the writ petition by directing the respondent authority to issue a speaking order on the petitioner's representation for pollution control equipment subsidy within four weeks. The court did not decide the merits of the claim.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the respondent authority to dispose of the representation dated 01.11.2018 by passing a speaking order within four weeks.

Shree Nanak Ferro Alloys Pvt. Ltd. Throughi Ts… — Service and Employment | Jharkhand HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(C) No.2370 of 2019

¶2

--------Shree Nanak Ferro Alloys Pvt. Ltd. ……… Petitioner

¶3

Versus

¶4

The State of Jharkhand

¶5

Director, Department of Industries

¶6

Deputy Director, Department of Industries

¶7

General Manager, Department of Industries

¶8

………. Respondents

¶9

¶10

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD

¶11

--------For the Petitioner : Mrs. Vinamra Agrawal, Adv. For the Resp.-State : Mrs. Aparajita Bhardwaj, Adv. ---

¶12

02/11.06.2019 The writ petition is under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, whereby and whereunder, the petitioner has prayed for the following two reliefs:-

¶13

(i) For directing the Respondents to consider and dispose of the representation dated 01.11.2018 filed by the petitioner (as contained in Annexure-10), wherein the petitioner has prayed for release of the Pollution Control Equipment Subsidy in terms of the Jharkhand Industrial Policy 2001, especially in view of the fact that the State Level Committee has already approved the claim of the petitioner for grant of the said subsidy.

¶14

(ii) For further directing the Respondent-authorities to immediately and forthwith release the pollution Control Equipment Subsidy of the Petitioner in terms of Clause 29.9 of the Jharkhand Industrial Policy 2001, especially in view of the fact that the Petitioner has fulfilled all eligibility criteria for release of the said subsidy and, in principle, approval has been granted by State Level Committee for release of the said subsidy in favour of the petitioner.

¶15

2. This Court after looking to the prayers which pertains to consideration and disposal of the representation dated 01.11.2018, thinks it proper to dispose of the writ petition by directing the

¶16

respondent authority to dispose of the representation by passing a speaking order in accordance with law.

¶17

3. Mrs. Aparajita Bhardwaj, learned A.C. to A.G. appearing for the Respondent-State has raised no such objection.

¶18

4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the aforesaid submission, the writ petition is being disposed of without entering into the merit of the claim of the petitioner by directing the Respondent No.2-Director, Department of Industries to dispose of the representation dated 01.11.2018, if not already disposed of within a period of four weeks’ from the date of receipt of copy of the order which shall be produced by the petitioner along with the aforesaid representation before the concerned respondent within a period of two weeks’.

¶19

5. Needless to say that if the respondent authority will take positive decision in favour of the petitioner, the appropriate decision shall be taken for release of the Pollution Control Equipment Subsidy. 6. In case any adverse decision, the same shall be communicated to the petitioner by passing a speaking order in accordance with law. 7. Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of.

¶20

(Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.)

¶21

Rohit/-

Shree Nanak Ferro Alloys Pvt. Ltd. Throughi Ts Director Mehul Basant v. the State of Jharkhand through the Secretary Department of Industries

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shree Nanak Ferro Alloys Pvt. Ltd. Throughi Ts Director Mehul Basant v. the State of Jharkhand through the Secretary Department of Industries

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Gokul Mahto Vs Most Rango Devi And Ors.

Basudeo Mahto And Ors. Vs State Of Jharkhand And Ors.

Sanjay Singh Vs Tata Iron And Steel Company Limited And Anr.

Satya Pal Verma Vs Qurban Quraisi

Ravi Narayan Mukherjee Vs Dr Rajendra Kumar Hazra And Ors.

Ms Magadh Spun Pipes Limited through Its Director Sri Subash Abhimanu Singh Vs the State of Jharkhand through the Chief Secretary