Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Himachal Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 14258 (HP)

M/S AGGARWAL STEEL INDUSTRIES PVT LTD v. THE STATE OF HP AND OTHERS

CWP/7941/2025 · 2025-06-19

Sushil Kukreja, Tarlok Singh Chauhan

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No. 7941 of 2025 Decided on: 19.06.2025 ______________________________________________________________ M/s Aggarwal Steel Industries Pvt. Ltd.        ....Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & Ors. .…Respondents _ Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Tarlok Singh Chauhan,  Judge. The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sushil Kukreja,  Judge. _______________________________________________________________ Whether approved for reporting? For the petitioner : Mr. Shrawan Dogra, Senior Advocate with Mr. Manik Sethi, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Mr. Yashwardhan Chauhan, Mr. I.N. Mehta, Senior Additional   Advocates   General, Mr. Ramakant Sharma, Mr. Navlesh Verma, Ms. Sharmila Patial, Mr. Sushant Keprate, Additional Advocates General and Mr. Raj Negi, Deputy Advocate General. Tarlok Singh Chauhan , Judge (oral) The instant petition has been filed for grant of the following substantive reliefs:­ “(A) Issue an appropriate writ to direct the respondents­ State that the ratio of decision rendered by this Hon’ble Court   in   judgment   dated   07.05.2025   in   CWP   No. 1667/2021 (Annexure P­2) shall apply mutatis mutandis to the case of the petitioner. 2 (B) Issue an appropriate writ to quash Clause 5 B of the 2019 Policy alongwith its enabling rules to the extent of it states “whichever is later”, as the same is itself against the   Industrial   Policy   2019   r/w   the   judgments   of   the Hon’ble Supreme Court as stated above. (C) Issue an appropriate writ to direct the respondents­ State to issue enabling notification under Clause 5 B of the Policy to disburse the benefits in terms of Clause 16(a) of the Policy.” 2. Learned Additional Advocate General has placed on record instructions dated 16.06.2025, relevant portion whereof reads as under:­ “Kindly refer to your office letter dated 20.05.2025 vide which the direction of Hon’ble Court to file reply to the petition, was conveyed. In this regard, it is submitted that the   Hon’ble   Court   in   the   similar   matter   of   CWP   No. 1667/2021, titled as M/s Kundlas Loh Udyog V/s State of H.P. vide its judgment dated 07.05.2025 has set aside Clause 5(B) of HPIIP, 2019 alongwith Rule, 4B(b) and 4(F) of the Rules regarding grant of incentives, concessions and facilities for investment promotion in HPIIP, 2019 to the extent they are inconsistent with the Industrial Policy, 2019 is under consideration. In pursuance, thereto, the matter is under consideration at the department level and having been involvement of policy decision, the matter is also required to be taken up with the Government and in order to take appropriate decision, the process may likely to take sometime.” 3. Now   that   the   respondents   themselves   have   not disputed   that   the   issue   raised   in   this   petition   is   squarely covered by the judgment rendered by this Court in CWP No. 1667/2021, titled as M/s Kundlas Loh Udyog Vs. State of H.P. 3 & Ors., we deem it appropriate to allow this petition for the reasons as recorded in CWP No. 1667/2021 (supra), which shall mutatis   mutandis apply   to   the   instant   case. Ordered accordingly. 4. Consequently, respondents No. 1 and 2 are directed to   issue   enabling   notification   under   Clause   16(A)   of   the Industrial   Policy,   2019   w.e.f.   the   date   of   commencement   of commercial production, i.e. 23.12.2021, within a period of four weeks’ from today. Pending application(s), if any, stands disposed of. ( Tarlok Singh Chauhan ) Judge ( Sushil Kukreja ) 19th June, 2025 Judge (raman)