M/S. Prospun Textile India Private Limited v. Textile Commissioner

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 25-03-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY M/s. Prospun Textile India Private Limited SF No. 234/1, Mettubavi Village, Via Vadachittur, Coimbatore 641 202, Tamil Nadu, Rep. By Its General Manager, Mr. V.Nandagopal ..Petitioner(s) Vs

1. Textile Commissioner Nishta Bhavan, 48, New CGO Complex, New Marine Lines, Mumbai, Maharashtra 400 020.

2. Canara Bank (formerly Syndicate Bank), Nodal Office - TUFS, Through its General Manager, Regional Office 1, Market Towers, E Wing, 2nd Floor, Cuffe Parade, Mumbai 400 005.

3. Canara Bank, (formerly Syndicate Bank), RS Puram Branch, Through its General Manager, 661 Mettupalayam Rd, RS Puram, Coimbatore 641 002.

..Respondent(s) Prayer: This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to take necessary steps to release the Technology Upgradation Fund Subsidy claim of the petitioner under the "Modified Technology Upgradation Fund Scheme".

For Petitioner(s) :

Mr.G.Guruprasath For Respondent(s) :

Mr.R.Rajesh Vivekananthan, Deputy Solicitor GOI for R1 No appearance for R2 & 3

ORDER

This writ petition is filed to direct the respondents to take necessary steps to release the petitioner's claim for Technology Upgradation Fund subsidy under the "Modified Technology Upgradation Fund Scheme".

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner's company is involved in a textile business and being eligible to avail the benefits under the Technology Upgradation Fund scheme, introduced by the first respondent. Subsequently, the petitioner has applied for the said benefits and the third respondent has also processed the same. However, the fund was not released to the petitioner. In this regard, he made a representation dated 03.12.2020 before the first respondent, who in turn replied that the petitioner's claim was included in the left out cases list. Hence, this writ petition.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would further submit that the petitioner has made an application for availing the subsidy before the third respondent, who has delayed in forwarding the same to the first respondent. Hence, he prays for appropriate direction to the respondents.

4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the materials available on record.

5. When the petitioner is eligible for availing the aforesaid subsidy, this Court is not inclined to accept the delay aspect highlighted by the first respondent. Assuming even if it was delayed, the first respondent is supposed to have considered the petitioner's claim, since he is eligible for the same.

6. In such view of the matter, this Court directs the second respondent to forward the petitioner's claim under Modified Technology Upgradation Fund Scheme to the first respondent. Upon receipt of the same, the first respondent is directed to consider the said claim and release the fund, if the petitioner is eligible or if it is otherwise in order.

With the aforesaid directions, this writ petition stands disposed of. No costs.

25-03-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order VM

KRISHNAN RAMASAMY, J.

VM To:

1. Textile Commissioner, Nishta Bhavan, 48, New CGO Complex, New Marine Lines, Mumbai, Maharashtra 400 020.

2. The General Manager, Canara Bank, (formerly Syndicate Bank), Nodal Office - TUFS, Regional Office 1, Market Towers, E Wing, 2nd Floor, Cuffe Parade, Mumbai 400 005.

3. The General Manager, Canara Bank (formerly Syndicate Bank), RS Puram Branch, 661 Mettupalayam Rd, RS Puram, Coimbatore 641 002.

25-03-2026