VIRENDER SINGH, J. - (1.) THE three Letters Patent Appeals on hand are directed against the judgment dated 1.10.2013 handed down by the learned Single Judge arising out of two writ petitions (W.P(C) Nos.4633/2010 and 5513/2011), filed by the Associated Cement Limited (for short ACC) and clubbed together. Both ACC and the State of Jharkhand are now aggrieved of the findings returned by the learned Single Judge on one or the other aspect; hence L.P.A Nos.385/2013 and 386/2013 by ACC and L.P.A No.129/2014 by the State of Jharkhand. We have also clubbed these three appeals, which are at admission stage. However, with the consent of the learned counsel of both sides, taken up for their final consideration. Admitted to hearing.
(2.) IN order to appreciate the controversy cropped up for our consideration in its right perspective, it becomes imperative to have the facts of the case in brief:
(3.) STATE of Jharkhand formulated a new Jharkhand Industrial Policy (for short Policy of 2001) by notification no.1888/2001, which was made effective from 15.11.2000. Clause 29.11 of Policy of 2001 contemplated special packages for new projects (Mega Units) with an investment of more than Rs.50 crores on case to case basis through negotiation with prospective investors. Clause 17 of the said Policy classifies the State into three categories A, B and C based on location. ACC in terms of the Policy of 2001 wanted revival of its Industrial Unit running into losses and falling under the Category C, i.e the most backward area. It is in "Chaibasa" as such, made an application to the then Chief Minister stating that since the Chaibasa Unit was not economical/viable and incurring heavy losses for the last 5 years, it (ACC) proposes to install a 12 LTPA Clinkering Plant at Chaibasa with an investment of Rs.270 crores which would also ensure continuity of another unit of ACC at "Sindri" (falling under different category) which would also provide livelihood at Chaibasa and Sindri. The Government was thus requested for grant of incentives and subsidies for this Mega Unit in terms of Policy of 2001. In this regard, certain letters were also written from ACC to the Chief Secretary, Jharkhand, in which a request was made to consider sales tax incentives on total sale and not on incremental sale with a further request to grant interest subsidy. It continued for some time. Thereafter Secretary, Department of Industries (Jharkhand) issued a Notification No.1885 dated 10th June, 2003 specifying the quantum of Capital Investment Incentive Subsidy (to be referred to as 'Incentive Subsidy' only) to be available to different types of Mega Units and other incentives as well. In terms of the aforesaid Notification/Order, for granting Incentive Subsidies to Mega Units, they were classified under the following three categories: - (I) New Industrial Units in which the capital investment of more than Rs.50 crores has been or is being made in terms of the Industrial Policy 2001; (II) Existing Industrial Units presently functioning industrial units in which, by way of expansion/diversification/modernization, capital investment above Rs.50 crores has been or is being made in terms of the Industrial Policy 2001; and (III) Loss Making, Existing and Functioning Industrial Units Those existing and functioning industrial units, which are, not sick but which may fall under the category of weak industrial units. Such industrial units, which have been incurring cash losses continuously since last two years. In such industrial units, capital investment of more than Rs.50 crores has been or is being made for expansion/diversification/modernization in terms of the Industrial Policy 2001. The aforesaid three categories for the purpose of incentives were classified as under: - K - Category (new Industrial Units); Kh - Category (Existing Industrial Units) and Ga - Category (Loss Making Existing and Functional Industrial Units). ;