Viswanathan Sridhar v. The Secretary

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 23-06-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ Viswanathan Sridhar S/o.Sridhar B, 212/213, St Marys Road, G2 Land Marvels Nest, V C Garden 3rd Street, Mandaveli, Raja Annamalaipuram Chennai- 028.

..Petitioner(s) Vs

1. The Secretary Ministry Of Micro, Small And Medium Enterprises, Nirman Bhawan, 7th Floor, Moulana Azad Road, New Delhi- 110 108.

2. Central Tool Room And Training Centre (cttc) Rep By Its President, Bhubaneswar, Odisha- 751 024.

3. Central Nodal Agency (cna) Rep By Its Development Commissioner, Ministry Of Micro, Small And Medium Enterprises, Nirman Bhawan, 7th Floor, Moulana Azad Road, New Delhi- 110 108.

4. B.S.Abdur Rahman Crescent Instiute Of Science And Technology Rep By Its Chancellor / Registrar, 120 Seethakathi Estate, Grand Southern Trunk Road, Vandalur, Tamil Nadu- 600 048.

5. Crescent Innovation And Incubation Council (CIIC) Rep By Executive Director, B.S.Abdur Rahman Crescent Institute Of Science And Technology 120, Seethakathi Estate, Grand Southern Trunk Road, Vandalur, Tamil Nadu- 600 048.

..Respondent(s)

RAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the Respondents Nos.4 and 5 herein to release forthwith the balance payment amount of Rs.3.825 lakhs due to the petitioner under the MSME Innovation scheme along with suitable monetary compensation including negative financial impact suffered by the petitioner.

For Petitioner(s):

Mr.R.Praveen For Respondent(s):

Mr. V.Chandrasekar for Mr. A.Kumaraguru, Senior Panel Counsel, for R1 to R3 Mr. S.Abubacker sidhic, for R4 & R5

ORDER

The writ petition is filed praying for a Writ of Mandamus, to direct Respondents Nos.4 and 5 herein to release forthwith the balance payment amount of Rs.3.825 lakhs due to the petitioner under the MSME Innovation scheme along with suitable monetary compensation including negative financial impact suffered by the petitioner.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that petitioner is an innovator and an entrepreneur who was selected as a winner under the MSME

Innovative Scheme for his project, "Urban Comics for Kids". In terms of the above scheme, the petitioner would submit that he is entitled to 3.825 lakhs.

3. However, learned counsel for first respondent would submit that petitioner had disentitled himself from the benefit of the MSME Innovative Scheme. In terms of the scheme, petitioner was supposed to bring an investment to the extent of 15% of the project cost, however, petitioner failed to comply with the said condition. After stating so, he would submit that, in any event, petitioner's representation would be considered and appropriate orders would be passed after issuing notice to petitioner and the fourth and the fifth respondent, who are the institution through which the funds under the MSME Innovative Scheme would be routed, wherever petitioner is entitled to.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that petitioner was unable to comply with the above condition of contributing 15% of the project cost solely in view of the fact that the host institution failed to open the required account. It is only in view thereof that petitioner was unable to comply with the said condition. He would also submit that petitioner cannot be disentitled from the benefit in terms of the MSME Innovative Scheme due to inaction on the part of the host institution.

5. Learned counsel for fourth and fifth respondent would submit that it is contrary to facts and material on record. In support of this submission, counsel has circulated documents demonstrating that, as a matter of fact, an account was indeed opened.

6. This court is not inclined to examine the above facts, and it is for the appropriate authority to go into the above facts and decide the merits of the petitioner's claim regarding benefit in terms of the MSME Innovative Scheme.

7. In view of the same, taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and the limited relief sought for in this Writ Petition, there shall be a direction to the concerned respondent to consider the petitioner's request on its own merits and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, after issuing notice and after affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to petitioner, 4th and 5th respondents and any other interested persons, within a period of four (4) weeks from the date of uploading of web copy without waiting for receipt of certified copy of the order. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any views with regard to the merits of the case and it is open to the concerned respondent to consider the case on its own merits and in accordance with law.

8. Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of. No costs. 23-06-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order jv To

1. The Secretary Ministry Of Micro, Small And Medium Enterprises, Nirman Bhawan, 7th Floor, Moulana Azad Road, New Delhi- 110 108.

2. The President, Central Tool Room And Training Centre (cttc) Bhubaneswar, Odisha- 751 024.

3. Tbe Development Commissioner, Central Nodal Agency (cna) Ministry Of Micro, Small And Medium Enterprises, Nirman Bhawan, 7th Floor, Moulana Azad Road, New Delhi- 110 108.

MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ, J.

jv 23-06-2026