GAHC010013952020 2025:GAU-AS:9806 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

Case No. : WP(C)/463/2020 ISHWAR FOOD PRODUCTS PVT. LTD.

TINGRAI HOOGRIJAN ROAD, PATIA PATHAR GAON, P.O- TINSUKIA-

786125, ASSAM, REP. THROUGH ITS DIRECTOR SRI SM AGARWAL, R/O-

SIDING BAZAR, TINSUKIA- 786125, ASSAM VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA AND 4 ORS REP. BY THE UNDER SECRETARY TO THE GOVT OF INDIA, MIN OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRIES, DEPTT OF INDUSTRIAL POLICY AND PROMOTION, UDYOG BHAWAN, NEW DELHI- 11

2:THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT OF ASSAM DEPTT OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRIES DISPUR GUWAHATI- 781006

3:THE COMMISSIONER OF INDUSTRIES AND COMMERCE ASSAM DEPTT OF INDUSTRIES GOVT OF ASSAM UDYOG BHAWAN BAMUNIMAIDAN GUWAHATI- 21

4:THE GENERAL MANAGER DISTRICT INDUSTRIES AND COMMERCE CENTRE P.O- BORGURI TINSUKIA- 786125 ASSAM

5:NORTH EASTERN DEVELOPMENT FINANCE CORPORATION LTD NEDFI HOUSE DISPUR GS ROAD GUWAHATI- 0 For the Petitioner(s) : Dr. A. Todi, Advocate For the Respondent(s) : Mr. R. K. D. Choudhury, Dy. SGI : Mr. A. Kalita, Standing Counsel : Mr. G. Das, Advocate Date of Hearing : 17.07.2025, 22.07.2025 Date ofJudgment : 22.07.2025 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH

JUDGMENT AND ORDER (ORAL)

Heard Dr. A. Todi, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner and Mr. R. K. D. Choudhury, the learned Deputy S.G.I. appearing on behalf of the Respondent No.1. I have also heard Mr. A. Kalita, the learned Standing counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondent Nos. 2, 3 and 4 and Mr. G. Das, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondent No.5. 2. The Petitioner herein has invoked the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court challenging the communication dated 20.11.2009 issued by the Under Secretary to the Government of India, Ministry of Commerce and Industry, Department of Industrial Policy and Promotion (DIPP) whereby compliance were sought for in the form of Checklists for scrutiny of all claims arising from transportation of raw materials and finished products prior or post

10.09.2009.

3. The grievance of the Petitioner is that in the Checklist-A which is for scrutiny of the claims pertaining to transport subsidy prior to 10.09.2009, there is a requirement being inserted that the person claiming subsidy has to produce the bank statement for payment made to transporter during the period (payment only by cheque). It is the specific case of the Petitioner that in respect to the claims for the period prior to 10.09.2009, the Petitioner’s claim cannot be rejected on the ground of the communication dated

20.11.2009 and more particularly Checklist-A.

4. In order to appreciate the grievances of the Petitioner, this Court finds it relevant to take note of the brief facts which led to the filing of the instant proceedings.

5. On 23.07.1971, the Government of India had notified a scheme for grant of subsidy on transportation of raw materials and finished goods to and from certain selected areas with a view to promote growth of industries. The Scheme (hereinafter referred to as the “Transport Subsidy Scheme”), has been amended from time to time.

6. A perusal of the writ petition does not reflect as to what business, the Petitioner is carrying out. Be that as it may, the Petitioner submitted claims in terms with the said Transport Subsidy Scheme for various periods. The details of the period of claim and the amounts so claimed by the Petitioner are reproduced herein under:

7. It is the further case of the Petitioner that although the Petitioner submitted those claims, the Petitioner was not paid any amount. This resulted in the Petitioner filing a writ petition before this Court wh