Court Orders Review of Petitioner's Power Subsidy Claim Under Enterprises Promotion Policy-2015 Within Eight Weeks.Seeking release of power subsidy in terms of the Enterprises Promotion Policy-2015 - HELD THAT:- It is deemed appropriate to dispose of the writ petition with a direction to respondents No.2 and 3 to examine the claim of the petitioner company against the backdrop of representation dated 04.02.2019 (Annexure P-13) and to take a final decision thereupon and to convey the same to the petitioner within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. It is however c... ... ... Issues:
Petitioner seeking mandamus for power subsidy release under Enterprises Promotion Policy-2015.

Analysis:
The petitioner, a private limited company, filed a petition requesting a mandamus to direct the respondent, Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd. (UHBVNL), to release the power subsidy as per the Enterprises Promotion Policy-2015. The petitioner claimed eligibility under the 2015 Policy but stated that the envisaged power subsidy had not been released despite raising the claim with necessary supporting documents. The counsel for the petitioner requested the writ petition's disposal with a direction for the concerned authority to examine the claim and make a final decision within a specified timeframe. The court found the counsel's submission just and reasonable.

The court decided to dispose of the writ petition by directing respondents No. 2 and 3 to review the petitioner company's claim based on the representation dated 04.02.2019 and make a final decision within eight weeks from the receipt of the court's order. However, the court clarified that it had not verified the accuracy of the petitioner's claims regarding eligibility for power subsidy under the 2015 Policy. The judgment emphasized that the court had not expressed any opinion on the petitioner's eligibility for the subsidy, leaving the decision to the concerned authorities.

In conclusion, the court disposed of the petition without determining the petitioner's eligibility for the power subsidy under the 2015 Policy. The judgment focused on directing the authorities to examine the claim and make a final decision within a specified timeframe, emphasizing that the court had not assessed the validity of the petitioner's assertions. Seeking release of power subsidy in terms of the Enterprises Promotion Policy-2015 - HELD THAT:- It is deemed appropriate to dispose of the writ petition with a direction to respondents No.2 and 3 to examine the claim of the petitioner company against the backdrop of representation dated 04.02.2019 (Annexure P-13) and to take a final decision thereupon and to convey the same to the petitioner within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. It is however clarified that this Court has not ascertained the correctness of the averments made in the petition and has not opined as regards the claim of the petitioner company to be eligible for the power subsidy under the 2015 Policy. Petition disposed off. M/s. Nufab Technical Textiles Private Limited Versus State of Haryana and Ors.
VAT and Sales Tax
2019 (4) TMI 2141 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT - TMI
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT - HC
Dated:- 1-4-2019
CWP No. 8601 of 2019 - -
CST, VAT & Sales Tax
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Tejinder Singh Dhindsa For the Petitioner : Mr. Vishal Aggarwal, Advocate. For the Respondent : None. ORDER TEJINDER SINGH DHINDSA, J.(ORAL) 1. Petitioner is a private limited company and has filed the instant petition seeking a mandamus for directing the respondent Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd. (UHBVNL) to release the power subsidy in terms of the Enterprises Promotion Policy-2015. 2. Case in a nutshell projected on behalf of the petitioner company is that inspite of being eligible under the 2015 Policy, the power subsidy which was envisaged thereunder has not been released. 3. Counsel submits that inspite of claim having been raised before the Corporation alongwith necessary supporting documents no response has been forth-coming. 4. He further submits that he would be satisfied if the writ petition was to be disposed of with a direction to the concerned authority to examine the claim of the petitioner and to take a final decision thereupon within a stipulated time frame. 5. Submission made by counsel is found to be just and reasonable. 6. In view of the above, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition with a direction to respondents No.2 and 3 to examine the claim of the petitioner company against the backdrop of representation dated 04.02.2019 (Annexure P-13) and to take a final decision thereupon and to convey the same to the petitioner within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. 7. It is however clarified that this Court has not ascertained the correctness of the averments made in the petition and has not opined as regards the claim of the petitioner company to be eligible for the power subsidy under the 2015 Policy. 8. Disposed of.
Case laws, Decisions, Judgements, Orders