S.B.Sinha, J. - (1.) In this writ application the petitioner has, inter alia, prayed for issuance of a writ of or to the nature of Mandamus commanding the respondents to grant central subsidy to the extent of Rs.11,38,952/- purported to be in terms of the letter dated 28.9.89 as contained to Annexure 'A' to the writ application.
(2.) The fact of the matter lies in a very narrow compass. The Director of Industries, Andaman and Nicobar Administration issued a booklet specifying facilities and incentives for the development of small scale industries in Andaman and Nicobar Islands clause 5 whereof states of grants of central investment subsidy. Admittedly, a scheme for payment of such central investment subsidy was to be made on the basis of the investments at the rate of 25% on fixed investment to new industrial units and also to existing industrial units taking up substantial expansion, which was made admissible to both small scale units as also large scale sectors. Allegedly, the petitioner, who was at the material time owner of a hotel situate in this Island, spent the aforementioned amount. It thereafter filed a claim for grant of such central investment subsidy.
(3.) It appears that by a letter dated 28.9.89, as contained in Annexure 'A' the Joint Secretary to the Government of India, recommended the cases of 32 units for grant of such subsidy to the Under Secretary of the Government of India, name of the petitioner appearing at serial No. 32 thereof. However, from the letter dated 21st May 1990, issued by the Joint Secretary to the Government of India and addressed to the Secretary, Industries Department, it appears that such subsidy was payable to such industries in relation whereto projects have been approved by the Approval Committee on or before 30th September 1988. Admittedly, no such approval of the amount was given by the State Level Committee prior to that date. It appears that on 26.2.89, the State Level Committee held its sitting and made recommendation for grant of such subsidy, inter alia, on the ground that the hotel of the petitioner was set up prior to 30th September 1988, and thus its case is covered by the aforementioned letter dated 28th September 1989. In the said letter 12 was stated: "All the 32 cases covered in the recommended statement relates to projects approved by the State Level Committee based on the SBI registration/DCTD registration and hence these units are eligible for grant of central Investment subsidy since all the units have invested before 30.9.88 and have also started production before 30.9.88. In this regard, it is also mentioned that such practice of treating registered units as units with approved project is being followed in the Union Territory of Pondicherry and the Union Territory, has in fact, disbursed subsidy to Industrial Units for the period of September to December 1989 on the above analogy." Despite the same, however, the amount was not paid.;