M/S. Consam Industries Pvt. Ltd. v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.2240 of 2022 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.17849 of 2016 ====================================================== M/s. Consam Industries Pvt. Ltd. a Private Limited Company incorporated under the provisions of Companies Act, 1956 having its registered office at Himalya Agro Chemicals, Raniganj Road, Forbesganj- 854318 through its Director Samar Goel (aged about 38 years) son of Shambhu Goel, Resident of Forbesganj, P.O.- Forbesganj, P.S. Forbesganj District- Araria. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through Sri Sandeep Poundrik the Principal Secretary, Department of Industry, Vikas Bhavan, Bailey Road, Patna. 2.

Sri Pankaj Dixit, the Director of Industries, Government of Bihar, Vikas Bhavan, Bailey Road, Patna.

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. S.D. Sanjay, Sr. Advocate.

Ms. Priya Gupta, Advocate.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Subhash Prasad Singh (GA 3) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 12-07-2024 Heard Mr. S.D. Sanjay, the learned Senior Advocate for the petitioner.

2. By order dated 03.03.2021 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 17849 of 2016, the Principal Secretary, Department of Industry was directed to examine the case of the petitioner in terms of the direction given by the Division Bench in C.W.J.C. No. 12104 of 2018 (M/S Sunny Stars Hotels Private Limited vs. the State of Bihar and Ors.) and also in terms of Industrial Incentive

Patna High Court MJC No.2240 of 2022(3) dt.12-07-2024 2/2 Policy, 2011 and act accordingly. The concerned respondent was also directed to take action positively within a period of three months from the date of production /receipt of a copy of the order referred to above.

3. Mr. Sanjay has informed this Court that though a decision has been taken, but that is not to his satisfaction for the reason that no good grounds have been given by the concerned respondent in not giving the incentives to the petitioner.

4. Should the petitioner so desire, such decision of the concerned respondent could be challenged in the appropriate forum.

5. However, it would serve no good purpose in continuing with this contempt petition.

6. The petition stands disposed off.

(Ashutosh Kumar, J) manoj/krishnaU