AADARSH SYNTHENTICS PVT LTD Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner is a partnership firm which had applied for loan of Rs. 22 lacs. However, the respondent Rajasthan Financial Corporation (for short `r. F. C. ') sanctioned only Rs. 19. 4 lacs on 7. 6. 88 (Annex. 1 ). On 29. 8. 89, the petitioner applied before the Joint Director, District Industries Centre, Bhilwara to sanction 15% subsidy under the Central Out-right Grant of Subsidy Schemes, 1971 (for short `the scheme of 1971' ). At this stage, it may be stated that the very scheme of 1971 came to an end on 30. 9. 88 i. e. almost more than a period of one year of the said request.

(2.) AS the request of the petitioner made on 29. 8. 89 was not acceded to, therefore, the petitioner is stated to have made numerous representations which are at Annex. 2 (16. 7. 91, 7. 8. 91 and 20. 11. 93 ).

(3.) MR. Purohit has also placed reliance upon a Division Bench judgment of this Court delivered on 29. 1. 97 in D. B. C. Special Appeal No. 70/95 which I would also like to reproduce which is as under:- " 29. 1. 97 Hon'ble MR. Justice P. C. JAIn Hon'ble MR. Justice MOHD. YAMIn MR. Sanjay Mathur, for the appellant. MR. V. R. Mehta, for the State. MR. S. G. Ojha, for the respondent. . . . . . With the consent of the learned counsel for the respective parties, the matter is finally heard. Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed before us the judgment delivered by the Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No. 6240/94 dated 5. 12. 95. In the said matter, the Supreme Court has directed as under: " Pursuant to the above quoted order MRs. Pratibha Karan, Joint Secretary, Ministry of Industry has passed the order dated Nov. 16, 1995. Copy of the order has been placed on the file of this case. We are of the view that so far as the cut-off date is concerned, the Joint Secretary has taken a fair and just stand. We agree with her that all the applications filed upto Sept. 30, 1988 should be considered for grant of central investment subsidy provided the said applications were complete in terms of the scheme dated August 26, 1971 as modified from time to time. In this view of the matter we set aside the judgment of the High Court and remand the case for fresh decision. All the applications filed before Sept. 30, 1988 may be considered for grant of the central investment subsidy provided the applications were complete under scheme. The High Court may keep in view the order passed by the Joint Secretary but shall take its own decision on merits of each case. The Joint Secretary in her order has found 12 industries mentioned in para 19 of the order to be eligible for grant of subsidy. We direct that subsidy be disbursed to these industries as per the decision of the Joint Secretary, if not already disbursed. The appeals and the special leave petitions are disposed of. No. costs. " In view of the Supreme Court decision, the appeal is allowed and it is directed that the appellant's application, if filed, on or before 30. 9. 88 be considered for grant of subsidy under the Central Investment Subsidy Scheme, 1971, as modified from time to time provided the application moved by the appellant is complete under the Scheme, within a period of 3 months from the placement of this order, and in the light of fulfilment of the conditions under the scheme prior to 30. 9. 88, grant subsidy to the appellant accordingly. No. order as to costs. "