1 Neutral Citation No. ( 2025:HHC:18005 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No. 8523 of 2022 Date of Decision: 06.06.2025 _____________________________________________________ M/s J.B. Rolling Mills Limited ....Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & others …Respondents ____________________________________________________ Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Tarlok Singh Chauhan, Judge Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sushil Kukreja, Judge Whether approved for reporting? No. ________________________________________________ For the petitioner : Mr. Ajay Vaidya, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Mr. Ramakant Sharma, Mr.Navlesh Verma, Ms. Sharmila Patial, Mr.Sushant Kaprate, Additional Advocates General and Mr. Raj Negi, Deputy Advocate General, for respondents No.1 to 3/ State. Ms. Sunita Sharma, Senior Advocate with Mr. Dhananjay Sharma, Advocate, for respondent No.4/HPSEBL. ________________________________________________ Tarlok Singh Chauhan, Judge (Oral) It is not in dispute that the instant petition was being listed alongwith CWP No.1667 of 2021, titled M/s Kundlas Loh Udyog Vs. State of HP & Ors, as common questions of facts and law were involved in both these petitions. However, for some strange reasons, this petition got de-linked after 24.05.2023 and came to be listed independently. As regards CWP No.1667 of 2 Neutral Citation No. ( 2025:HHC:18005 ) 2021, the same was allowed by this Bench, vide its decision dated 07.05.2025. Record reveals that like the petitioner in CWP No.1667 of 2021, the petitioner herein had undertaken substantial expansion of the unit (Unit-II) w.e.f. 25.07.2021. 2. It is further not in dispute, rather admitted that the unit does not fall in the negative list of ‘The Himachal Pradesh Industrial Investment Policy, 2019’. Once that be so, obviously the case of the petitioner is squarely covered by the judgment rendered in CWP No.1667 of 2021. 3. Accordingly, for the reasons as recorded in CWP No.1667 of 2021 (supra), which shall be read mutatis mutandis to the facts and circumstances of the present case, the instant petition is allowed and respondent No.2 is directed to issue the enabling notification in terms of the incentive under clause 16(A) of the Industrial Policy, 2019 w.e.f. the date of commercial production qua the petitioner within a period of four weeks from today. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. (Tarlok Singh Chauhan) Judge (Sushil Kukreja) June 06, 2025 Judge (VH)