Anima Hazarika, J.

1. Heard Ms. N. Saikia, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. S.C. Shyam, learned Central Government Counsel (CGC for short) for the respondents. All these three writ petitions are listed for admission hearing today. Vide order dated 22.9.2008, while issuing notice of motion, this Court recorded the statements made by Ms. Saikia, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners to the effect that as the other petitions, which are similarly situated with the present writ petitions have already been decided by this Court, an endeavour may be made to dispose of these writ petitions at the admission stage itself Since similar facts and common questions of law are involved in these writ petitions, as agreed to by the learned counsel appearing for the parties, they are heard and proceeded together at the admission stage itself, pursuant to order dated 22.9.2008 mentioned hereinabove and disposed of by this common judgment and order.

2. Ms. Saikia, learned counsel for the petitioners has brought to the notice of this Court the order dated 24.10.2008 wherein the Court recorded the statement made by Mr. Shyam, learned CGC appearing for the respondents and had passed the following order:

WP(C) No. 227 (SH) 2008

Heard Ms. N. Saikia, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. S.C. Shyam, learned CGC.

It is pointed out by Mr. S.C. Shyam, learned CGC which is not disputed by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the judgment and order which is stated to have covered this case is under challenge in a writ appeal filed by the respondents and that the operation of the said judgment and order has also been stayed by the appellate Court. In view of this submission, it will be more expedient to defer the taking up of this case till the time the writ appeal in question is disposed of by the appellate Court.

Order accordingly.

Similar orders were passed in WP (C) No. 228 (SH) 2008 and WP (C) No. 229 (SH) 2008.

3. Referring to the above order passed by this Court Ms. Saikia has submitted that the writ appeals challenging the order dated 20.6.2008 passed by the learned single Judge in a batch of 7 (seven) similarly situated writ petitions filed by the Union of India have been disposed of by a Division Bench of this Court vide order dated 27.11.2008, whereby and whereunder the Division Bench disinclined to interfere with the common judgment and order dated 20.6.2008 thereby rejecting the writ appeals having no merit The Division Bench further directed the concerned authorities/appellants to comply with the directions of the learned single Judge within a period of 90 days from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment

4. To avoid unnecessary repetition of facts, which are almost common to all writ petitions, I shall first deal with WP(C) No. 227 (SH) 2008 in details, inasmuch as, prayer made in the writ petitions are same.

WP(C) No. 227 (SH) 2008

5. In WP(C) No. 227 (SH) 2008, petitioner has prayed for a direction to the respondents to release the financial assistance under the Scheme For Promotion of Industries in the North East ('SPINE' for short) provided by the Government of India under the 10th Plan to be paid by the North Eastern Council (NEC for short) in terms of the letter dated 05.05.2006 of the Chief Division (NEC Cell), Planning and Development Department. The pleaded case of the petitioner is that the petitioner M/s. Tirupati Food Products is a proprietorship registered firm having permanent registration No. 180300435 dated 28.9.2003 as a S.I. unit. The petitioner's firm has been engaged in production of mustard oil, poly packaging etc. giving employment opportunities to the local youths and thereby has earned good reputation in the business. Considering the demand, infrastructure facilities, capital investment, cost and profitability, employment potential based on socio-economic conditions, the petitioner had decided to increase the production capacity of the unit for production of mustered oil, poly-