IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAV (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY,THE SEVENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA WRIT PETITION NO: 4013 OF 2024 Between: Emami Agrotech Limited, represented through its authorized representative, Shri Rajpal Sharma, S/o Sh. Satbir Singh, Aged 42 years, Having Registere office at 687, Anandapur, EM Bypass, 3rd Floor, Kolkata - 700 107, West Bengal and Additional place of business at Survey No 501- 510, Near Zero Point. Krishnapatnam Port, Pantapalem Village, Muthukuru Mandal, SPSR Nellore District, Nellore-524323, Andhra Pradesh ...PETITIONER AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Through the Principal Secretary, Revenue (CT-II) Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravati. Guntur District, Andhra Pradesh. 2. State of Andhra Pradesh, Through the Special Chief Secretary, Industries and Commerce Department Secretariat. Velagapudi, Amaravathi, Guntur District, Andhra Pradesh 3. The Commissioner of industries. Commerce and Export Promotion Floor, APIK Towers, Mangalagiri, Guntur District 4. The General Manager, District Industry Centre, A.K. Nagar, Nellore-4, SPSR Nellore District 5. Andhra Pradesh State Financial Corporation, represented through its Managing Director, Plot OS No.2, 2"^ Cross, 3^*^ Road Industrial Park, Auto Nagar, Vijayawada - 520007 Andhra Pradesh, 8th 6. Chairman, State Level Committee, Andhra Pradesh Industrial Infrastructure Corporation Limited, 8'^ Floor, APIIC Towers, Mangalagiri, Guntur District. 7. Deputy Director, Director of Industries, Directorate of Industries Floor, APIIC Towers, Mangalagiri, Guntur District. 8. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Department of Finance and Planning, Secretariat Buildings, Velagapudi Amaravati, Guntur District. (R8 is Suo-Moto implead as per the Court’s order dt.07.04.2025 in Writ Petition and affidavit) 8 ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the Fligh Court be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order may or direction more particularly i) A writ of and/or order and/or direction in the nature Mandamus be issued commanding and directing the respondents to immediately disburse sanctioned and pending power cost and tax incentives for the period 2015- 16 and 2016-17 amounting to Rs. 42,40,28,428/- under the Andhra Pradesh - Industrial Investment Promotion Policy for 2005-10 Petitioner within such time frame (lIPP) in favour of the may be directed by this Hon’ble Court, in the nature of Mandamus be pay interest @ power cost Incentive as ii) A writ of and/or order and/or direction issued commanding and directing the respondents to also 12% p.a. for the delay in disbursement of sanctioned and tax incentives for the period 2015-16 and 2016-17 amounting to Rs. 42,40,28,428/- under the Andhra Pradesh - Industrial Investment Promotion Policy for 2005-10 (lIPP) in favour of the Petitioner, lii) A writ of and/or order and/or direction in the nature of Mandamus be issued commanding and sanction letter for the application directing the respondents to dispose/issue made for grant of reimbursement of power cost incentive pertaining to period April, 2016 to June, 2016 and to ensure disbursement of the said sanctioned amount in terms of the payment mode as envisaged i the lIPP 2005-10; iv) Rule Nisi in terms of prayers (i) to (ii) above v) Costs of the petition; vi) Any other order which this Honble Court may deem fit in the interest of Justice, equity and good conscience. lA NO: 1 OF 2024 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the Respondent No. 4 and 5 to disburse at least fifty percent of the incentives which has been sanctioned by the Respondent No. 3 and/or pending disposal of the above writ petition. lA NO: 2 OF 2024 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to grant interim relief in the form of a mandatory injunction to the Respondent No. 4 and 6 to dispose the application made for grant of reimbursement of power cost incentive pertaining to period April, 2016 to June, 2016. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI SAI SUNDEEP MANCHIKALAPUDI Counsel for the Respondent No.1: GP FOR REVENUE Counsel for the Respondent Nos.2,3&4: GP FOR INDUSTRIES AND COMMERCE Counsel for the Respondent No.5:SRI Y. BALAJI, SC FOR APSFC Counsel for the Respondent Nos.6 & 7:M/s. SANTHI CHANDRA, SC FOR APIIC Counsel for the Respondent No.8:GP FOR FINANCE AND PLANNING The Court made the following: ORDER / / APHC010071992024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3458] MONDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA WRIT PETITION NO: 4013/2024 Between: ...PETITIONER Emami Agrotech Limited AND ...RESPONDENT{S) The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others Counsel for the Petitioner: TSAI SUNDEEP MANCHIKALAPUDI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP FOR FINANCE PLANNING 2.GP FOR REVENUE 3.SANTHI CHANDRA SC ForAPIIC 4.GP FOR INDUSTRIES COMMERCE The Court made the following: ORDER:- Heard Sri Avinash Desai, learned Senior Counsel representing Sri Sai Sundeep Manchikalapudi, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue and learned Assistant Pleader for Finance and Planning. 2 The writ petition is filed challenging the action of the respondent authorities in not disbursing the tax reimbursement incentive and terms of Clause 21.0 of the 2. cost reimbursement incentive in Guidelines for Implementation of Scheme of IIPP-2005-10 issued power Operational vide G.O.Ms.No.178, Ind. & Com. (IP) Department, dated 21.06.2005 and the issued vide G.O.Ms.No.327, Ind. & Com. (IP) “Operational Guidelines’ Department, dated 13.12.2005 issued under the Andhra Pradesh Industrial Investment Promotion Policy for 2005-10 (IIPP) despite sanction of the said incentives by respondent No. 6 under Clause 17 of the Operational Guidelines, as communicated to the petitioner by the respondent No. 7. contended that the petitioner had set up an industrial unit at Port, Zero Point, Pantapalem (V), 3. It is Sy.No.501 to 510, Krishnapatnam Muthukuru (M), SPSR Nellore District for manufacture and sale of edible oils and fats. The petitioner commenced commercial production in 2012. Under the Industrial policy of 2005-10, various benefits and assistance was provided to new industries and expansion of existing units. 4. The petitioner contends that it had made substantial investments the authorities have further assured that the aggregating to Rs.240 crores incentives guaranteed would be granted to the petitioner and to that extent sanctioned letters were also issued. It is contended that the lIPP 2005-10 is applicable to all eligible new industrial units set up in the State of Andhra Pradesh except the 01.04.2005 in the cities of 5. Municipal Corporation limits as existing on 3 Hyderabad, Vijayawada and Visakhapatnam. The said unit of the petitioner does not fall within the Municipal Corporation limits of Hyderabad, Vijayawada and Visakhapatnam. The unit of petitioner in respect of which the instant writ petition has been filed would fall under Mega Projects category of industry the petitioner's investment in fixed capital was to the tune of Rs.240 crores. It is contended that the Government of Andhra Pradesh have issued orders extending various incentives to the petitioner vide G.O.Ms.No.111, Ind. & Com. (IP) Department, dated 30.11.2010 following: as 6. including the a) 50% VAT/CST reimbursement to units for a period of 5 years from the date of commencement of commercial production. b) Power cost reimbursement @ Rs.0.75 per unit during the first year of the policy and thereafter for the remaining four years the of reimbursement would be rate so regulated on yearly basis keeping in view of the changes in the tariff structures to ensure that power cost to the industry is pegged down to the first year's level. ” 7. It is stated that in terms of Clauses 5.3.0 and 5.7.0 of the Power Cost provides that 25% of the VAT/CST paid during one financial year will be ploughed back to Industries a grant by the Government towards the payment of tax during next year. Such benefit would be available for five (5) years from the date of of production i.e., up to sixth year. The petitioner contends that the unit has to submit its claims i the prescribed application form for reimbursement of Operational Guidelines the petitioner is entitled to reimbursement” and "Reimbursement of Tax as commencement 8. in commercial tax within 4 V . six (6) months after completion of the financial year along with required documents Claim has accordingly been made duly certified by Commercial Tax Authorities for original unit. 9. It is contended that on the basis of the same, the petitioner had applied for and got the sanctions of reimbursement of Sales Tax Cost from the Office of Commissioner of Industries as follows: and Power Particulars Period Amount sanctioned (Rs.) Sanction reference Letter Apr’ 15-Jun'15 53,74,577 10/2018/288/Emami dated 05.07.2018 '30/1/20122081/208 I'd dated 19.07.2016 SLC DTD 22/09/2016 _dated 22.09.2016 SLC DTD 22/09/201^ dated 22.09.2016 PTI1602072 12.03.2018 >T11602073' 12.03.2018 PTI1700001 12.03.2018 20/3/12/2083 31.10.2016 STX1700002 12.03.2018 Juri5-Sep'15 65,55,473 Oct'15-Dec'15 61,66,344 Power Cost reimbursement Jan'16 - Mar'16 57,51,049 Juri6-Sep’ 16 68,75,176 dated Oct’16-Dec’16 83,67,744 dated Jan’17-Mar'17 45,05,944 dated 2015-16 18,15,64,180 dated Sales Tax reimbursement 2016-17 19,88,67,941 dated 10. It is contended that after the sanction of incentives the petitioner was assured that the incentives would be disbursed in due course as per the sanction letters. But, even after a lapse of 5-7 years from the issuance of sanction letters, the respondents have not disbursed the sanctioned sums towards reimbursement. 5 11. The respondents have filed a Memo dated 05.11.2024, adopting the counter affidavit filed by the respondents in W.P.No. 16895 of 2024. The learned senior counsel Sri Avinash Desai appearing for the learned counsel petitioner Sri Sai Sundeep Manchikalapudi, relies on a decision of this Court in W.P.No.16895 of 2024 and batch of cases, wherein this Court following the decision in W.P.No.29482 of 2022 dated 10.04.2023 and W.P.No.20439 of 2023 dated 06.11.2023 and the order of the revision passed in W.A.No.724 of 2021 & batch dated 12.10.2023, allowed the writ petitions. The learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner Sri Avinash Desai relying on the said decision requests the Court to pass the same order, as the issue is squarely covered by the said decisions. Per contra, the learned Government Pleader for Mines and Industries argues that the writ petition is not maintainable in as much as the petitioner has approached this Court belatedly. And further submits that the petitioner was informed that the sanctioned industrial incentives would be disbursed as per seriatim of sanctions and as per budget allocations and there is no timeframe has been fixed for release of the incentives. Perused the record. This Court while disposing of the writ petition in W.P.No.16895 of 2024 has observed as follows: 12. 13. 14. 13. Accordingly, all the Writ Petitions are allowed directing the respondents concerned to pay the amounts to the petitioners along with interest @ 6% per annum, in view of common order of a learned Division Bench of this Court passed in .WA.No.724 of 2021 and batch, dated 12.10.2023 within a period of four (04) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order." 6 The respondents have adopted the same counter affidavit that was filed in W.P.No. 16895 of 2024 and no difference from the previous writ petition has been pointed out. Having regard to the contentions advanced, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition in terms of the order passed in W.P.No.16895 of 2024 and batch of cases dated 31 12.2024. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. There shall be no 15. 16. order as to costs. As a sequel, interlocutory applications, pending if any, shall stand closed. Sd/- K.J. RAJA BABU assistant REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECT|6nt)FF1CER To, 1. The Principal Secretary, Revenue (CT-II) Department, State of Andhra Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravati, Guntur District, Andhra Pradesh, Pradesh. 2. The Special Chief Secretary, Industries and Commerce Department, of Andhra Pradesh, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravathi, Guntur State District, Andhra Pradesh 3. The Commissioner of Industries, Commerce and Export Promotion Floor, APIK Towers, Mangalagiri, Guntur District th Andhra Pradesh, 8 4. The General Manager, District Industry Centre, A.K. Nagar. Nellore-4, SPSR Nellore District 5. The Managing Director, Andhra Pradesh State Financial Corporation, Plot OS No.2, 2nd Cross, 3rd Road Industrial Park, Auto Nagar Vijayawada - 520007 6. The Chairman, State Level Committee, Andhra Pradesh Industrial Infrastructure Corporation Limited 8th Floor. APIIC Towers, Mangalagiri, Guntur District. 7. The Deputy Director Floor, APllC Towers, Mangalagiri, Guntur District. Director of Industries, Directorate of Industries, 8 th /■ 8. One CC to Sri Sai Sundeep Manchikalapudi, Advocate [OPUC] 9. Two CCs to GP for Revenue, High Court of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT] 10. One CC to M/s. Santhi Chandra, SC for APIIC [OPUC] 11. One CC to Sri Y. Balaji, SC for APSFC[OPUC] 12. Two CC’s to GP for Revenue, High Court of A.P. at Amaravati[OUT 13. Two CC’s to GP for Industries and Commerce, High Court of A.P. at Amaravati[OUT 14. Two CC’s to GP for Finance and Planning, High Court of A.P. at Amaravati[OUT 15. Three CD Copies. /' r ssb HIGH COURT DATED:07/04/2025 ORDER WP.No.4013 of 2024 DISPOSING OF THE W.P. WITHOUT COSTS