SABARKANTHA JILLA RU UTPADAKONI CO OP SPINNING MILLS LIMITED Vs. GENERAL MANAGER DISTRICT INDUSTRIES CENTRE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition is filed by the petitioner Co-operative Society registered under the Gujarat Co-operative Societies Act, 1961, for an appropriate writ, direction and/or order directing the respondent-Authorities to pay to the petitioner-Society remaining amount of cash subsidy of Rs. 14,37,500.00 with interest at the rate of 12% with effect from 2/03/1984 till the date of payment of the amount since the petitioner unlawfully and illegally deprived of the said payment by the respondents.

(2.) It is the case of the petitioner that it is a Co-operative Society registered under the Gujarat Co-operative Societies Act, 1961. It is doing business in manufacturing cotton yarn. The members of the petitioner-Society are agriculturists growing cotton and Co-operative Societies of various villages of Sabarkantha District. It is stated in the petition that at the time when the petition was filed, there were about 7000 members of the petitioner-Society and about 1200 employees were working. It was a large-scale industry established in 1964.

(3.) According to the petitioner, with a view to encourage industrial development in rural and backward areas to have balanced growth in the State of Gujarat and with a view to decentralize industries in the developed areas and cities like Ahmedabad, Baroda and Surat, the respondent issued a resolution in the form of a Scheme (Annexure 'A/1') on 22/12/1977 evolving a suitable package of incentives. According to the petitioner as per Scheme, it was eligible to cash subsidy to the extent of 15% of its fixed assets installed for the purpose of expansion or Rs. 25 lacs whichever was less. Then it is stated by the petitioner that on the basis of various promises held out in the Scheme and publicity given by the respondent-Authorities that the petitioner was tempted to expand its industry and invested very large amount of Rs. 1,76,78,000.00 in building, plant and machinery from 1980 to 1983 and thereby expanded its industry within the meaning of clause 6(iv)(b)(c)(d) of Annexure 'A/1'. Since the petitioner was entitled to cash subsidy of Rs. 25 lacs it made an application on 24/08/1982 to the first respondent furnishing all the details required under the Scheme. After receiving the said application, detailed inquiries were made by the first respondent with a view to verify whether the facts stated by the petitioner in its application were correct and complete. According to the petitioner, even a report was prepared by the first respondent and was placed before the State Level Committee of the second respondent for consideration and decision was taken on 21/09/1983 and cash subsidy of Rs. 25 lacs was sanctioned. The petitioner was intimated about the said decision by a letter dated 3/10/1983 and pursuant to the said decision and sanctioning of the subsidy a part payment of Rs. 10,62,500.00 was also made on 2/03/1984. During that period, the agreement which was required to be executed by the petitioner was also executed on 20/10/1983. Now, looking to the said agreement, it clearly appears that cash subsidy of Rs. 25 lacs was sanctioned on certain terms and conditions which have been mentioned in the said agreement. In the terms and conditions it was specifically stated that if the Government would be satisfied that the subsidy was obtained by the applicant by making mis-representation as to an essential fact, or if the applicant goes out the production within five years after the commencement, the Government would be entitled to claim refund of the subsidy from the applicant after giving an opportunity of being heard.