W.P.(C) No.16629 of 2017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.16629 of 2017 (In the matter of an application under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India) Odisha Merchandise Pvt. Ltd., Maheswarpur, Champua …. Petitioner -versus- State of Odisha and others …. Opposite Parties Advocate(s) appeared in this case:- For Petitioner : Mr. S. Mishra, Advocate For Opposite Parties : Mr. U.R. Jena, A.G.A. For O.P. Nos.1 to 6 & 9 Mr. S.S. Mohapatra, Advocate For O.P. Nos.7 & 8 CORAM: JUSTICE B.P. ROUTRAY JUDGMENT 6th July 2026 B.P. Routray, J. 1. Heard Mr. S. Mishra, learned Advocate for the Petitioner, Mr. U.R. Jena, learned Additional Government Advocate for State- Opposite Parties and Mr. S.S. Mohapatra, learned Advocate for Opposite Parties 7 & 8. 2. The Petitioner has prayed for quashing of letter dated 04.11.2023 of the authority under Annexure-39 and further, has prayed to grant Digitally Signed Signed by: BASANTA KUMAR BARIK Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 13-Jul-2026 18:59:47 Signature Not Verified W.P.(C) No.16629 of 2017 release of the differential Capital Investment Subsidy (in short, “CIS”) along with Top-up subsidy. The prayer of the Petitioner is re-produced below:- “(a) The letter dated 04.11.2023 issued by the Director, Horticulture-cum-Ex-Officio Additional Secretary to Government [opposite party No.2] in rejecting the Petitioner’s representation on Capital Investment Subsidy [CIS] for Cold Storage at Champua, Keonjhar vide Annexure - 39 be set-aside/ quashed. (b) The opposite parties be directed to release the differential amount of Capital Investment Subsidy [CIS] @ ₹2,10,00,000/- [Rupees Two Crores Ten lakhs only] in terms of the Comparative Evaluation Sheet prepared by the Joint Technical Committee of the Directorate of Horticulture vide Annexure - 26. (c) The opposite party be directed to release additional State Govt. Top-up subsidy of Rs. 80 lakhs instead of 60 lakhs as per the government notification dtd.30.04.2015 vide Annexure - 37.” 3. The Petitioner’s case is that, he purchased the land measuring area Ac.2.00 decimals under Khata No.80/6, Plot No.505/601 of mouza-Maheswarpur on 23.11.2013 from one Maa Tarini Cold Storage Private Ltd. for establishment of 5000 MT capacity Cold Storage Unit, and said project was sanctioned by the Bank of Baroda for term loan of Rs.380 lakhs and working capital of Rs.100 lakhs. The project and the plant design were duly approved by the BDO and other Officers concerned. After due verification, the above project was sanctioned as eligible to avail the subsidy under the Mission for Integrated Digitally Signed Signed by: BASANTA KUMAR BARIK Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 13-Jul-2026 18:59:47 Signature Not Verified W.P.(C) No.16629 of 2017 Development of Horticulture (“MIDH”). Then a go-ahead letter was issued in favour of the Petitioner on 05.02.2015 mentioning that said proposal of construction of cold storage unit was approved by the Government of India under NHM (National Horticulture Mission) Scheme and accordingly approved that, the assistance by way of subsidy would be to the tune of Rs.200 lakhs with additional subsidy of 20% (60 lakhs) as per the State Agriculture Policy-2013. 4. Subsequently, the Deputy Director of Horticulture, Keonjhar vide its letter dated 27.02.2015 (Annexure-10) cancelled its earlier go- ahead letter dated 05.02.2015 for the reason that the previous subsidy to the tune of Rs.23.125 lakh has already been released for the same project in respect of one Maa Tarini Cold Storage Pvt. Ltd. 5. It needs to be stated here that the Petitioner initially purchased the land from Maa Tarini Cold Storage Pvt. Ltd. Said Maa Tarini Cold Storage Pvt. Ltd. vide its letter dated 17.03.2015 intimated the National Horticulture Board that the old semi-built structure was damaged and in a collapsible condition and so it had to dispose of said land for clearing its liabilities. It is important to note that the Petitioner after purchase of the land from Maa Tarini Cold Storage Pvt. Ltd. had Digitally Signed Signed by: BASANTA KUMAR BARIK Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 13-Jul-2026 18:59:47 Signature Not Verified W.P.(C) No.16629 of 2017 started his new company, i.e. Odisha Merchandise Pvt. Ltd. for establishing the new cold storage project. 6. After such clarification received by the authority, the Director of Horticulture, Odisha proposed for a joint inspection team to evaluate the entire project as is done in the name of Commercial Agro Enterprises (CAE) projects based on prevalent guidelines for the purpose of CIS under State Agriculture Policy-2013. The Joint Inspection Team was required to submit the evaluation report for taking further action for recommendation, if any. Then the same is required to be placed before the State Level Committee constituted for sanction of CIS under State Agriculture Policy-2013 for approval. 7. Consequently, a Joint Inspection Team was constituted and the report was submitted on 1.10.206. The recommendation part of the inspection committee is relevant to be re-produced here. The same is as follows:- “The cold store project was approved under NHM by Govt. of India for construction of new building with provision of fin coil forced air cooling system with admissible project cost of Rs.400.00 lakh & admissible subsidy of Rs. 200.00: lakh under NHM. An additional subsidy @ 20% limited to Rs.60.00 lakh was approved under Horticulture Mission Plus by State Govt as per Agriculture Policy-2013. Since the project was approved before promulgation of new cost norms under State potato Digitally Signed Signed by: BASANTA KUMAR BARIK Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 13-Jul-2026 18:59:47 Signature Not Verified W.P.(C) No.16629 of 2017 Mission, the additional subsidy was limited to Rs.60.00 lakh. A detail calculation sheet with evaluation report is enclosed. The evaluation of building has been calculated as per OPWD plinth area rate after depreciation & the evaluation of plant & machinery has been made as per the invoices & bills submitted by the promoter. The evaluation report of the financing bank is also enclosed. The promoter has installed the plant & machinery in an old RCC building for which subsidy had already been released by NHB for Rs.23.125 lakh (@12.5 % of the eligible project cost of Rs.185.00 lakh) during 2002 (copy enclosed). However, the present promoter has invested in purchasing the land & RCC structure & completed the cold store by installing plant & machineries. In the present scenario, if approved, the subsidy may be considered under State potato Mission after deducting 12.5 % of the present eligible project cost of Rs.400.00 lakh subject to final commissioning & completion of the balance work, since part subsidy has already been released to another entrepreneur, but for the same project.” 8. Then the authority slept over the mater for which the Petitioner approaches this Court in the present writ petition. This Court vide its order dated 23.07.2019 (in I.A. No.9453 of 2019) directed that pendency of the writ petition shall not be a bar for the appropriate Government to take decision on the admissibility of the quantum of subsidy to the Petitioner and the question of his entitlement. After this order was passed by the Court, the authority did not proceed to consider it for a long period, but ultimately vide order dated 04.11.2023, the Director of Horticulture communicated the Petitioner that his application in response to his letter dated 04.09.2023 has been Digitally Signed Signed by: BASANTA KUMAR BARIK Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 13-Jul-2026 18:59:47 Signature Not Verified W.P.(C) No.16629 of 2017 answered to the effect that the representation of the Petitioner on CIS for cold storage is declined for consideration by the Government in Agriculture and Farmer’s Empowerment Department pending final decision of EOW Bhubaneswar P.S. Case No.15 dated 02.09.2016. It is the further case of the Petitioner that, again the Economic Offences Wing (EOW) of Crime Branch of Odisha vide letter dated 10.11.2022 has clarified that Smt. Bishnupriya Sahoo, the owner of Odisha Merchandise Pvt. Ltd. or any of its other promoters has not availed any subsidy in respect of Odisha Merchandise Cold Store, Champua as per the letter of the Director of Horticulture, Odisha dated 22.11.2016, and further, a subsidy amounting to Rs.23.125 lakhs has been released by National Horticulture Board (NHB), Gurgaon to Maa Tarini Cold Storage Pvt. Ltd. during the year 2002. 9. It is the grievance of the Petitioner that, despite such clarification issued by the EOW pertaining to P.S. Case No.15 dated 02.09.2016, the authorities have declined to consider the prayer of the of the Petitioner for CIS for the cold storage. 10. A counter affidavit has been filed for the State stating that the feasibility report of the project was for a new cold storage and the same Digitally Signed Signed by: BASANTA KUMAR BARIK Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 13-Jul-2026 18:59:47 Signature Not Verified W.P.(C) No.16629 of 2017 was sent for approval to Government of India under the National Horticulture Mission and approved as a new project. But the promoter has proceeded with repairing of old cold storage unit for which the money was sanctioned previously under the National Horticulture Mission. Therefore, the contentions of the Petitioner to get CIS as a new project is not satisfied and the criminal case relating to earlier sanction given in favour of the same old project has been registered. Nevertheless, the impugned order does not speak about such stand taken in the counter affidavit and only says that the prayer of the Petitioner for CIS is not considered for the pending criminal case. 11. Opposite Parties 7 & 8, i.e. the Mission Director, MIDH have filed their counter supporting the stand of State Government. 12. On verification of Annexure-39, 40 and Annexure-Q/2, it is found that EOW P.S. Case No.5 dated 20.03.2018 has been mistakenly mentioned in the rejection order dated 04.11.2023 at Annexure-39 instead of EOW P.S. Case No.15 dated 02.09.2016. It is thus understood accordingly that, the only Police Case is EOW P.S. Case No.15 dated 02.09.2016. Digitally Signed Signed by: BASANTA KUMAR BARIK Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 13-Jul-2026 18:59:47 Signature Not Verified W.P.(C) No.16629 of 2017 13. It is true that in order to consider the admission of eligibility of the Petitioner to receive the subsidy under the National Horticulture Mission, the authorities constituted a Joint Inspection Committee, who had visited Odisha Merchandise Cold Storage at Maheswarpur, Champua and submitted their report as per Annexure-22. The State has not disputed this fact in the counter while denying the eligibility of the Petitioner to get CIS under the National Horticulture Mission. As reproduced above, the recommendation of the Joint Technical Committee under Annexure-22 is clear to the effect that the Petitioner’s unit, i.e. M/s. Odisha Merchandise Pvt. Ltd. is eligible to receive the subsidy under State Potato Mission under Odisha Agriculture Policy-2013. Since the project was approved before promulgation of new cost norms under the Odisha Potato Mission, the said recommendation was made for release of the alleged subsidy after adjustment of the earlier subsidy released in favour of Maa Tarini Cold Storage Pvt. Ltd. The entire case of the Petitioner is for consideration of his prayer for receipt of CIS for the cold storage, i.e. M/s.Odisha Merchandise Pvt. Ltd. The entire effort is for availing the subsidy for the cold storage which has been clarified in the report of the Joint Inspection Committee at Annexure-22. As per the observation of the Digitally Signed Signed by: BASANTA KUMAR BARIK Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 13-Jul-2026 18:59:47 Signature Not Verified W.P.(C) No.16629 of 2017 Technical Committee, the cold storage of the Petitioner may not be eligible or admissible under the National Horticulture Mission, but what is recommended is for release of subsidy under the State Potato Mission. However, it is seen from the impugned order under Annexuer-39 that this report of the Technical Committee and other relevant factors in support of the Petitioner to receive the subsidy was not considered due to pendency of EOW P.S. Case No.15 dated 02.09.2016. At the same time, the authority did not look into the clarification issued by the EOW in their letter dated 10.11.2022 and this is apparent from the impugned order as well as from the counter. 14. It is not the case of the State-Opposite Parties that for issuance of such order dated 04.11.2023 under Annexure-39, the clarification of the EOW dated 10.11.2022 under Annexure-10 was taken into consideration by the authority. 15. Apart from everything, it is seen that the order of rejection under Annexure-39 is a cryptic one without mentioning any reason in detail and only shows that the consideration of representation of CIS for cold storage was declined for pending EOW P.S. Case No.15 dated 02.09.2016. Though in the counter affidavit, it is submitted that the Digitally Signed Signed by: BASANTA KUMAR BARIK Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 13-Jul-2026 18:59:47 Signature Not Verified W.P.(C) No.16629 of 2017 Petitioner’s unit, i.e. Odisha Merchandise Pvt. Ltd. is not eligible for receipt of any CIS under National Horticulture Mission, but at the same time it is not denied for receipt of subsidy as recommended by the Joint Inspection Committee under State Potato Mission. This being the entire situation, it is found appropriate to direct the authority for consideration of the application of the Petitioner for grant of subsidy under the eligible scheme. 16. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the Government, i.e. Opposite Party No.1, to consider the prayer of the Petitioner for grant of subsidy in the light of the recommendation made in the Joint Inspection report dated 01.10.2016 (Annexure-22) within a stipulated period, preferably within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order along with a copy of the writ petition. (B.P. Routray) Judge B.K. Barik/A.R.-cum-Senior Secretary