Point of Law: Since there is no specific direction that their decision must be only in a particular manner, the respondents 1 to 3 have a right to take a decision of their choice either in granting or refusing the subsidy. Of course the ultimate decision must project that they have made a due consideration of the two reports strictly in accordance with law.

ORDER :

This Contempt Case is filed by the petitioner against respondents 1 to 3 in W.P.No.27644/2017 on the ground that they have not complied with the order dated 21.01.2020 in the said writ petition. This Court passed the order as follows:

“4. In that view, this writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents 1 to 3 to consider the reports dated 10.10.2018 and 11.12.2018 submitted by the Joint Inspection Committees and pass an appropriate order strictly in accordance with the Rules within eight (8) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and communicate the same to petitioner.”

2. The petitioner belongs to S.C. community and he is a businessmen. The Union Government to encourage the businessmen extended loan components to carry out various business houses. So far as the SC/ST businessmen are concerned, Union Government taken up special drive in extending helping hand for setting up infrastructure facilities and also granting subsidy facilities. The petitioner initially started production of granite cutting unit/polishing unit and established KKM Granites as proprietary concern as a small scale industry by obtaining loan and also by availing subsidy during the year 2009. By successful management the petitioner was able to repay the entire loan to the lending authority in the year 2012. While so, to expand her business and to crate more employment opportunities the petitioner established a new partnership firm under the name and style of M/s. JL Granites in the year 2013 operating from shed Nos.6, 7 & 8 situated in Dokiparru Village, Medikonduru Mandal, Guntur District. The petitioner availed term loan of Rs.95.00 lakhs and working capital of Rs.20.00 lakhs from her banker M/s. Andhra Bank, Srinagar Colony Branch, Guntur District. Thereafter, the petitioner filed an application in September 2013 requesting 1st respondent in the writ petition to grant subsidy. The 1st respondent after proper verification satisfied with the financial status of the petitioner issued letter dated 06.07.2015 recommending for sanction of subsidy of Rs.47,83,915/- to the petitioner firm. However, subsequently by letter dated 20.12.2018 the petitioner was informed that the subsidy was reduced to Rs.35,77,568/- without disclosing any reasons even the said amount was not paid to her. Hence, the petitioner having waited for four years filed present writ petition wherein this Court directed the respondents 1 to 3 in the writ petition to consider the reports dated 10.10.2018 and 11.12.2018 of the Joint Inspection Committees and pass an appropriate order within eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

(a) Subsequent to the said order, the Director of Industries (DOI), Vijayawada, called for a meeting on 03.03.2020 to which the petitioner attended and submitted all the relevant documents. Even thereafter also subsidy was not sanctioned and no order was passed. As per the petitioner’s information, the DOI addressed a letter dated 03.03.2021 to 2nd respondent stating that there were no defects in the claim of the petitioner and every claim has to be decided within 120 days as per the rules and recommended for sanction of the subsidy. However, the respondents/contemnors have not taken up any positive action.

Hence, the contempt.

3. The 1st respondent/1st contemnor filed the counter opposing the Contempt Case and contended thus :

(a) On receiving the order of the Court, the Deputy Secretary to Government, Industries & Commerce Department and Director of Industries, A.P., Vijayawada has issued directions on 19.02.2020 to take further immediate necessary action. The GM, DIC submitted a file with remarks to the District Collector on 20.02.2020 and placed before the DIPC meeting held on 29.02.2020 and the then District Collector & Chairman, DIPC instructed to run separate file in the matter. After that the DOI convened a meeting on 03.03.2020 with the GM, DIC and Sri V.Bala Vazra Babu on behalf of the petitioner. During the said