IMPORTANT POINT
Claims for transport subsidy under the Transport Subsidy Scheme, 1971 should be processed without undue delay, and rejections based on administrative lapses are not permissible.

JUDGMENT :

MANISH CHOUDHURY, J.

1. By this writ petition instituted under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have raised a grievance that despite being eligible to receive subsidy under the Transport Subsidy Scheme, 1971, they have been unjustly denied from receiving the same. The petitioner no. 1 is a company incorporated under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956 with its registered office at Kolkata, West Bengal and the petitioner no. 2 is the General Manager – Commercial of the petitioner no. 1 company.

2. It is stated that the petitioner no. 1 company is a company, which deals in fast moving consumer goods [FMCGs]. It is engaged in manufacture of ayurvedic medicines and cosmetics under the brand names, ‘Hemani,‘Emami’&‘Jandu’. The petitioner no. 1 company [hereinafter also referred to as ‘the petitioner’ and/or ‘the petitioner company’, for easy reference] has a total 7 [seven] manufacturing units all over India with two such units within Assam at Amingaon and Abhaypur respectively. The petitioner company has preferred the instant writ petition in respect of its claim arising out of its manufacturing unit situate at the Export Promotion Industrial Part [EPIP], Amingaon.

3. It is the case of the petitioners that attracted by the incentives provided under the provisions of the Transport Subsidy Scheme, 1971 framed by the Government of India and the Industrial Policy Resolution of 1997 published by the Government of Assam, the petitioner company had set up a manufacturing unit at the EPIP, Amingaon in and around the year 2003 when the Transport Subsidy Scheme, 1971 was in vogue. The commercial production from the manufacturing unit situate at the EPIP, Amingaon of the petitioner company commenced from 27.09.2003. The petitioner company got its manufacturing unit at the EPIP, Amingaon registered with the District Industries & Commerce Centre [DI&CC], Kamrup under the Transport Subsidy Scheme, 1971 and the said registration was effected by the DI&CC, Kamrup on and from 30.03.2004 vide Registration Certificate no. DICC/K-TS/2003-2004/305. As per the Registration Certificate dated 30.03.2004, the items of production from the petitioner company’s manufacturing unit at the EPIP, Amingaon were [i] Ayurvedic Antiseptic Creams; [ii] Medicated Oil; and [iii] Shampoo.

4. Finding itself eligible to claim subsidy under the Transport Subsidy Scheme, 1971, the petitioner company submitted an application before the General Manager, DI&CC, Amingaon on 28.09.2006 wherein the petitioner company made the claim for transport subsidy for the quarterly period from 01.10.2004 to 31.12.2004. The petitioner company submitted applications claiming transport subsidy for different quarterly periods including the quarterly periods viz. [i] from 01.04.2004 to 30.06.2004; [ii] from 01.07.2004 to 30.09.2004; [iii] from 01.10.2006 to 31.12.2006; and [iv] from 01.01.2007 to 31.03.2007. Though the petitioner company had submitted applications for transport subsidy in respect of few other quarterly periods, such claims are not necessary to be referred to as the claims for those periods were approved by the respondent authorities. So far as the petitioner company’s claim for the quarterly period : 01.10.2004 to 31.12.2004, the said claims were rejected by the State Level Committee [SLC] in its Meeting held on 25.03.2008. In respect of the four quarterly periods, mentioned above together, the petitioner company’s claims were rejected by the State Level Committee [SLC] in its 37th Meeting, held on 30.03.2009. Aggrieved by such rejections of its claims, the petitioner company has approached this Court by this writ petition contending that its claims for the afore-mentioned five quarterly periods had been arbitrarily and unjustly rejected by the respondent authorities.

5. I have heard Dr. A. Saraf, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. N.N. Dutta, learned counsel for the petitioner; Mr. R.K. Deb Choudhury, learned Deputy Solicitor General of I