Government incentive scheme eligibility cannot be enlarged by a subordinate committee; provisional benefits create no vested right.

A Government incentive scheme confined benefits to new industrial units that commenced implementation on or after the stipulated cut-off date and reserved final eligibility determination to the Government. A State Level Committee, being only a subordinate body, had no independent power to relax or modify the scheme conditions; any such relaxation could be granted only by the State Government. Temporary registration and eligibility certificates issued subject to ratification created no vested right and conferred no enforceable entitlement to continue benefits. On those facts, cancellation of the provisional benefits was valid, and the plea of breach of natural justice was unavailable. The article also notes that relief could still be sought from the State Government in accordance with law.

---

---

Issues: Whether an industrial unit that had applied for project finance before the cut-off date was eligible for benefits under the Liberalised State Incentive Scheme, whether the State Level Committee could relax or modify the conditions of the Government Order, and whether cancellation of the temporary registration and eligibility certificate without notice violated natural justice.

Analysis: Clause 10 of G.O. Ms. No. 498 confined the scheme to new industrial units that had taken implementation steps on or after the stipulated date and expressly made the Government's decision on eligibility final. The State Level Committee was only a creature of the Government and had no independent power to alter the conditions of the scheme. Any relaxation could be granted only by the State Government. The temporary registration and eligibility certificate were issued subject to the clear stipulation that they conferred no vested right and were effective only if ratified in accordance with the Government Order. In those circumstances, the petitioner could not claim a right to continue the benefit on the basis of the Committee's recommendation, and the plea of violation of natural justice was not available.

Conclusion: The petitioner was not eligible for the incentive scheme on the facts stated, the State Level Committee lacked authority to relax the scheme conditions, and the cancellation of the temporary benefits was valid.

Final Conclusion: The writ petition failed, though liberty was left to the petitioner to seek relaxation or modification from the State Government in accordance with law.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a Government incentive scheme expressly reserves final eligibility determination to the Government, a subordinate committee cannot enlarge eligibility or relax the scheme, and no enforceable right arises from a provisional benefit granted subject to that reservation.

---