DEBANGSU BASAK, J. - (1.) The petitioners have sought for a direction upon the respondents to issue Registration Certificate (RC-II) and Certificate for Commercial Production for the Kalaikunda, Kharagpur unit and to disburse the entitlements under the West Bengal State Support for Industries Scheme, 2008.
(2.) Learned senior advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioners has submitted that, the petitioners are entitled to disbursement under the Scheme of 2008. He has submitted that, the petitioners obtained consent to establish a factory for manufacturing Sulfuric Acid, spent Sulfuric Acid and Captive Power being comforted by the provisions of the Scheme of 2008. The first petitioner had applied for benefits under such Scheme on December 5, 2011. The application was for obtaining Registration Certificate in part one (RC-I). By a letter dated January 28, 2013, the petitioners informed the respondents that the trial production is to commence from February
(3.) , 2013 and that, the expected date of commencement of commercial production is February 20, 2013. According to him, the second respondent was obliged to issue the registration certificate within 45 days from the date of receipt of the application, that is, on or before January 22, 2012. However, the registration certificate was issued on March 6, 2013 after a gap of 15 months. Such registration certificate was forwarded under cover of a letter dated March 13, 2013. According to him, the Scheme of 2008 requires an applicant to apply for Registration Certificate in part two (RC-II) only after receipt of the Registration Certificate in part one (RC-I). The petitioners having received the Registration Certificate in part one (RC-I) only on March 13, 2013, thereafter applied for issuance of the Registration Certificate in part two (RC-II) on October 29, 2013. According to him, there was no delay on the part of the petitioners in applying for issuance of the Registration Certificate in part two (RC-II). The petitioners followed up the application for issuance of the Registration Certificate in part two (RC-II) by several correspondence. The respondents replied to the letters written by the petitioners. The petitioners provided all details that the respondents required during the exchange of correspondence. The fourth respondent undertaken fixed capital investment assessment of the first petitioner. The fourth respondent completed the fixed capital investment reassessment of the petitioners and forwarded the RC-II to the second respondent after being satisfied about the credentials of the first petitioner. According to the learned Senior Advocate for the petitioners, this was the second fixed capital investment assessment of the first petitioner done by the fourth respondent. It is thereafter that the second respondent claimed that, the petitioners allegedly violated paragraph 7.2 of the Scheme of 2008. 3. Learned senior advocate appearing for the petitioner has submitted that, delay if any in applying for and obtaining the Registration Certificate part two (RC-II) cannot be attributed to the petitioners. In any event, the same is not fatal to the claim lodged by the petitioners. The respondents cannot deny benefits under the Scheme of 2008 simply on the ground of alleged delay in applying for and obtaining Registration Certificate part two (RC-II). He has referred to the various clauses of the Scheme of 2008 and submitted that, there is clause 70 which allows condonation of delay if there be any. Moreover, in the facts of the present case, there was no delay on the part of the petitioners. Therefore, there is no justifiable reason for the second respondent to withhold the benefits under the Scheme of 2008 by not issuing the Registration Certificate part two (RC-II) of the Scheme of 2008.;