SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2021 Supreme(Ori) 176

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CUTTACK
Dr. S. Muralidhar, S.K. Panigarhi, JJ.
M/s. Maa Bhairabi Industries Llp - Appellant
Versus
State Of Odisha & Ors. - Respondents
Writ Petition (Civil) No. 5449 of 2018
Decided On : 13-07-2021

Advocates Appeared:
Mr. Rajendra Kumar Pradhan, Advocate, for the Appellant; Mr. M.S. Sahoo; Additional Government, Advocate, for State Mr. S.S. Padhy Additional Standing Counsel, for the Respondent.

The main legal point established in the judgment is that the retrospective denial of government benefits must be justified and cannot be arbitrary, as it violates the principles of promissory estoppel and legitimate expectation.

Headnote:

OFP Policy, 2013 - Benefit Withdrawal - - [Orissa Food Processing Policy, 2013] - The court discussed the retrospective withdrawal of the capital investment subsidy (CIS) under the Orissa Food Processing Policy, 2013 and its impact on the petitioner's rice mill unit. The court highlighted the arbitrary nature of the decision and its violation of Article 14 of the Constitution.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner, a registered partnership firm, established a rice mill unit in expectation of receiving capital investment subsidy (CIS) under the Orissa Food Processing Policy, 2013. However, the benefit was retrospectively withdrawn, leading to a demand for Central Sales Tax and Entry Tax.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the retrospective denial of CIS benefits under the OFP Policy, 2013 was entirely arbitrary and in violation of Article 14 of the Constitution.

Issues: The key issues included the arbitrary retrospective withdrawal of CIS benefits, the petitioner's legitimate expectation, and the demand for Central Sales Tax and Entry Tax.

Ratio Decidendi: The court applied the principles of promissory estoppel and legitimate expectation to hold that the retrospective denial of CIS benefits was arbitrary and violated Article 14 of the Constitution.

Final Decision: The court quashed the decision to reject the petitioner's proposal for CIS under the OFP Policy, 2013 and directed the issuance of necessary orders granting the petitioner the CIS benefits. The demand for Central Sales Tax and Entry Tax was also directed to be withdrawn.

JUDGMENT

Dr. S. Muralidhar, CJ. - The short question that arises for consideration in this writ petition is whether the benefit under the Orissa Food Processing Policy, 2013 (OFP Policy, 2013) can be sought to be withdrawn retrospectively and particularly after the Petitioner has altered its position in the expectation of grant of capital investment subsidy (CIS) as assured in the said policy ?

2. The Petitioner is a registered partnership firm, which is running a rice mill unit at Angul District in the State of Odisha. The Petitioner was issued by the District Industries Centre, Angul (DIC) (Opposite Party No.3) an acknowledgement on 12th May, 2015 for establishment of a rice mill with reference to online application submitted by it on 9th May, 2017. The date of the first fixed capital investment was taken as 12th May 2015.

3. On 29th May, 2017, the DIC received the Petitioner's application form for grant of CIS under the OFP Policy, 2013 enclosing all the relevant documents. Importantly, it was mentioned therein that the Petitioner had completed the construction of new 8 ton per hour (TPH) parboiling rice mill plant at Mukundapur, District Angul and had already obtained DIC registration on 22nd May, 2017.

4. As admitted by the Opposite Parties 1 to 3 in their counter affidavit, on receipt of the above application, the DIC advised the Petitioner to obtain a production certificate. The Opposite Parties 1 to 3 have in their counter affidavit further acknowledged that the Petitioner's unit was inspected and found running and on that basis, a production certificate was issued on 30th October, 2017 indicating the date of commercial production as 14th March, 2017.

5. Thereafter, on 29th November, 2017 the proposal for sanction of CIS in favour of the Petitioner under the OFP Policy, 2013 was recommended by the General Manager, DIC, Angul to the Director of Industries of Odisha, Cuttack (Opposite Party No.2). 6. It appears that one day prior thereto i.e. on 28th November, 2017 unknown to even Opposite Party No.3 a letter was written by the Special Secretary to Government, MSME Department (Opposite Party No.1) to Opposite Party No.2 on the subject of "Limiting Capital Investment Subsidy". The said letter read as under:

    "Sir,

    I am directed to say that, during the last review meeting of the activities of the MSME Department undertaken by the Chief Secretary, Odisha held on 02.02.2017, it was observed that a good number of Rice Mills, Dal Mills and Rice & Dal Mills may be included in the negative list of OFPP-2016.

    Accordingly Rice Hullers and Rice Mills, Flour Mills (excluding Roller Flour Mills), Pulse Mills and Besan Mills have been included in the list of ineligible enterprises/industries of OFPP-2016 vide amendment Notification No.4652/MSME dt. 31.07.2017 to OFPP-2016.

    As regards CIS under OFPP-2013, no proposal for assistance would be entertained after 12.04.2017, DICs/RICs may be informed accordingly."

7. At no point prior to the above letter was any intimation sent to the DIC, or made public, that the CIS for rice mills under the OFP Policy 2013 was being withdrawn and that too retrospectively from 12th April, 2017 onwards. In fact the above letter gives no reason for the above date of 12th April, 2017 being chosen as the cut-off date. The letter itself refers to a decision regarding inclusion of Rice Mills, Dal Mills and Rice and Dal Mills in the negative list of the subsequent policy i.e. the OFP Policy, 2016. Even in the counter affidavit of Opposite Parties 1 to 3 no reasons whatsoever have been given for retrospectively withdrawing the CIS benefits under the OFP Policy, 2013 fro 12th April, 2017 onwards.

8. On the basis of the above communication, a letter was written by the Additional Director of Industries in the Office of the Director of Industries (Opposite Party No.2) to the General Manager, DIC, Angul (Opposite Party No. 3) that since the CIS application from the Petitioner Unit was received on 29th May, 2017, and since no pro

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top