Siddhartha Chattopadhyay, J. - (1.) Repeated rejections by the Administration, in spite of Hon'ble Court's time to time directions to consider the grievances and claims of the Writ petitioners, is the subject matter of challenge. All these Writ applications are taken up at a time being interlinked with each other as common question of law is involved.
(2.) Being unsuccessful in getting a favourable order in connection with the Order No.1369 dated 05.9.2013, these Writ applications have been filed by the Writ petitioners praying for setting aside the impugned order.
(3.) The controversy lies within a very narrow compass, as the factual scenario is almost undisputed. The specific grievance, as ventilated by the petitioners, is such that the scheme for 50% capital subsidy to Tourism, IT, Fisheries, Coconut and Areca nut related activities was notified on 29th March, 2005. All the present petitioners initially had been functioning under the style of 'single unit'. In 2005, they prayed for subsidy individually under the aforesaid scheme but that was turned down.;