Judicial review of sales tax exemption refusal failed where the petitioner had already exhausted policy benefits and showed no enforceable right.

Article 226 review was confined to the legality of the administrative process, not to reappraisal of the merits of a claim for continued sales tax exemption under an industrial policy. The petitioner had already received the policy benefits available, including exemption for the permitted period and other subsidies, and sought extension beyond the policy term. The Court treated the alleged diversion of funds as a relevant circumstance and found no vitiating defect in the decision-making process. As no enforceable or indefeasible right to further exemption was shown, no judicial interference was warranted and the writ petition failed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the petitioner was entitled to judicial interference with the impugned order refusing further sales tax exemption under the industrial policy, and whether any enforceable right existed to claim exemption beyond the period already availed.

Analysis: The challenge was examined within the limited scope of judicial review under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The impugned decision recorded that the petitioner had already availed multiple policy benefits, including sales tax exemption for five years and other subsidies, and that the claim was for extension of exemption beyond the policy period. The decision-making record also referred to diversion of funds by the company, which was treated as a relevant circumstance. In such matters, the Court does not sit in appeal over the administrative decision but only examines whether the decision-making process is vitiated. The claim for additional exemption was held to rest on no enforceable or indefeasible entitlement.

Conclusion: No ground for interference was made out, and the challenge to the impugned order failed.

Final Conclusion: The writ petition was rejected because the petitioner had already received the policy benefits available to it and could not compel further exemption as of right.

Ratio Decidendi: A writ court will not interfere under Article 226 with an administrative decision denying continuation of fiscal exemption when the claimant has already exhausted the policy benefits and no indefeasible right to further exemption is shown.

---