2025:HHC:4226 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.2779 of 2025 Date of Decision: 03.03.2025 _____________________________________________________________________ RRD Oil & Fats Pvt. Ltd. ……...Petitioner Versus Union of India & Ors. …....Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? For the Petitioner: Mr. Sunil Mohan Goel, Senior Advocate with Mr. Raman Jamalta, Advocate. For the respondent: Mr. Shiv Pal Manhas, Senior Panel Counsel, for respondents No. 1 & 2. Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General, Mr. Rajan Kahol, Mr. B.C Verma & Mr. Vishal Panwar, Additional Advocate Generals, with Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General, for respondents No. 3 & 4. ___________________________________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral) By way of instant petition, petitioner has prayed for the following main reliefs:- “(i) That the impugned letter dated 30.07.2024 (Annexure P- 13) and impugned letter dated 9.11.2023 (Annexure P-14) may kindly be struck or read down/quashed to the extent it has been applied to the petitioner, thereby rejecting Registration of its unit under Industrial Development Scheme, 2017 by issuance of an appropriate writ of certiorari. ii) That this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue writ of mandamus directing respondent No. 1 & 2 to formally register the petitioner's online application dated 22.03.2021; as being eligible under the Industrial Development Scheme, 2017 and grant registration to the petitioner as per Industrial Development Scheme, 2017 and further order to allow the claim of the petitioner for grant of incentive under Claim the Consequential Central Capital Investment Incentive for Access to Credit (CCIIAC) @ 30% of the investment expenditure incurred on the petitioner project.” 2. Before reply, if any, from the respondents could be received, learned counsel representing the petitioner, while inviting attention of this Court to judgment dated 06.01.2025 passed by this Court in CWP No. 10600 of 2020 along with connected petitions titled as Atul Sharma Vs. Union of India & Ors. alongwith connected matters, states that issue raised in the instant proceedings already stands adjudicated by this Court in Atul Sharma (supra) and as such, petitioner would be content and satisfied in case directions are issued to the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner in the light of aforesaid judgment in a time bound manner. 3. Having regard to the nature of prayer and order proposed to be passed in the instant petition, this Court sees no necessity to call for the reply from the respondents, who are otherwise represented by Mr. Rajan Kahol, learned Additional Advocate General and Mr. Shiv Pal Manhas, learned Senior Panel Counsel. While accepting notice on behalf of the afore respondents, Mr. Rajan Kahol, learned Additional Advocate General and Mr. Shiv Pal Manhas, learned Senior Panel Counsel, fairly state that case of the petitioner, if not already decided, shall be decided expeditiously. 2 4. Consequently, in view of above, this Court, without going into the merits of the case, deems it fit to dispose of the present petition with a direction to the respondents to consider and decide the case of the petitioner, expeditiously preferably within a period of six weeks in light of judgment detailed hereinabove. Needless to say, authority concerned, while doing the needful in terms of instant order, shall afford an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner and pass speaking order thereafter. Applications, if any, stand disposed of. March 03, 2025 (Sandeep Sharma), (sunil) Judge 3