UNION OF INDIA Vs. J.TARIANG

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 10.05.2010 passed in W.P.(C) No. 110 (SH) of 2008, allowing the writ petition, whereby, while quashing the letter dated 09.12.2009, issued by the Deputy Secretary, Government of India, Ministry of Commerce and Industry, Department of Industrial Policy and Promotion, for short, DIPP, keeping the release of the Transport Subsidies in abeyance until further order, directions were issued to the present appellant as well as the respondent Nos. 4 and 5 in the writ petition to release the transport subsidies for the period (i) 01.04.1996 to 31.03.1997 and (ii) 1.04.1998 to 04.12.1999, amounting to Rs. 6,55,216/- and Rs. 6,35,193/-, respectively, to the writ petitioner within a period of one month from the date of the receipt of the judgment with a further direction to the appellant and the respondent No. 5 in the writ petition to pay simple interest @ 12% per annum on the aforesaid amount from the date of pre-audit report dated 24.11.2003, till realization of the said transport subsidies for wrongfully withholding the same. Aggrieved, the Union of India, represented by the Secretary, Government of India, Ministry of Commerce and Industry, Department of Industrial Policy and Promotion has preferred this appeal.

(2.) The case of the writ petitioner, briefly, as set out in the writ petition is that the writ petitioner is the proprietor of "Meghalaya Chemical and Calcinates", a Lime Calcination Plant and is a small scale industry, which was set up in the year 1994. The writ petitioner had availed of loan from Meghalaya Industrial Development Corporation. The writ petitioner, was entitled to Transport Subsidy and from time to time the writ petitioner had prepared and submitted claims on account of, amongst others, Transport Subsidies to the General Manager, District Industries Centre, Jaintia Hills District, Jowai (respondent No. 3 in the writ petition). The writ petitioner received Transport Subsidies for the year 1994-1995, 1995-1996 and 1997-1998. Claim was submitted for the year 1996-1997, which was scrutinised by the State Level Committee set up to scrutinise such claims. The writ petitioner was informed by the Commissioner and Secretary, Industries Department, Government of Meghalaya by a letter dated 08.09.2001 that Transport Subsidy for the period 1996-1997 and from 01.04.1998 to 04.12.1999, amounting to Rs. 12,90,409/- was sanctioned and that the writ petitioner may contact the General Manager, North-East Development Finance Corporation Ltd. (respondent No. 4 in the writ petition), which is the disbursing authority. The respondent No. 4, also by a letter dated 16.10.2001, had informed that the claim for Transport Subsidy which was approved by the State Level Committee/District Level Committee was forwarded by the respondent No. 2 for disbursement to the writ petitioner and by the said letter, the writ petitioner was requested to comply with certain directions for early disbursement of the amount. While the matter rested at that, a letter dated 13.01.2003 was received from the respondent No. 2 directing the petitioner to resubmit certain challans and details of expenditure. The writ petitioner by letter dated 28.03.2003 questioned the authority of the respondent No. 2 to ask for the very same documents which were supplied earlier. The writ petitioner had also filed a writ application before this Court which was registered as W.P.(C) No. 190 (SH) of 2003 questioning the inaction of the respondents in not releasing the Transport Subsidy due to the writ petitioner, which, however, came to be dismissed for non-prosecution by an order dated 09.11.2006. There were number of correspondences between the parties and in response to letter dated 29.01.2008 of the writ petitioner, the respondent No. 4 had replied by a letter dated 04.02.2008 informing that the claimed amount of Rs. 12,90,409/- was held up because of pre-audit report dated 24.11.2003.

(3.) The stand of the respondent No. 1/appellant is that in terms of the letter dated 04.05.1993, reiterated by a letter dated 09.05.1994, issued by way of clarification under Transport Subsidy Scheme, the State Governments/Union Territories were informed not to accept claim more than one year old from the date of incurring expenditure and that subsidies in question were not released in view of the claim being made after inordinate delay, on 08.05.2001. It is also indicated that the claims were 'pre-audited' by the Principal Accounts, Office of DIPP and in the report dated 31.10.2003, it was opined that claims cannot be recommended for disbursement.