IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA CWP No.3666 of 2025 Decided on: 22nd March, 2025 _________________________________________________________________ M/s Tavleen Resorts and Spa Pvt. Ltd. ....Petitioner Versus UOI & Ors …Respondents _________________________________________________________________ Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua 1 Whether approved for reporting? _________________________________________________________________ For the petitioner: Mr. Sunil Mohan Goel, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Paras Dhaulta, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Rajender Thakur, Central Government Counsel for respondents No. 1 and 2. Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Mr. Y.P.S.Dhaulta, Additional Advocate General, for respondents No.3 and 4. Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Mr. Rajender Thakur, learned Central Government Counsel and Mr. Y.P.S Dhaulta, learned Additional Advocate General, accept service of notice on behalf of respondents No.1 & 2 and respondents No. 3 & 4, 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? yes - 2 - respectively. With the consent of learned counsel for the pastries, matter is heard at this stage. 2. Petitioner is aggrieved against the action of the respondents in rejecting registration of its unit under Industrial Development Scheme, 2017 under office communication dated 09.11.2023 (Annexure P-13). Petitioner’s further grievance is to the office communication dated 15.10.2024 (Annexure P-14), whereunder, the case of the petitioner has been reflected as “Closed” in DPIIT portal. 3. Petitioner also seeks direction to the respondents to register its online application dated 22.03.2021 as being eligible under the Industrial Development Scheme, 2017 and also to grant registration to the petitioner as per Industrial Development Scheme, 2017. The substantive reliefs prayed for by the petitioner read as under:- “(i) That the impugned letter dated 30.07.2024 (Annexure P-12) and impugned letter dated 9.11.2023 (Annexure P-13) 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 and further communication dated - 3 - 15.10.2024 (Annexure P-14) issued by respondent No. 4 stating therein that the case of the petitioner has been reflected as closed in DPIIT portal may also be quashed and set aside by issuance of 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 (CCIAC) @ 30% of the investment expenditure incurred on the petitioner project.” 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner invited attention to Annexure P-15, a decision rendered in Atul Sharma Vs. Union of India and others2 and submits that the issues involved in this writ petition and the grievances of the petitioner have already been adjudicated in the aforesaid decision. Learned counsel prays that similar directions be issued in this present case as well. The operative directions issued in Atul Sharma’s2 read as under:- “21. Consequently, in view of the detailed discussion made herein as well as law taken into consideration, this Court finds merit in the present petitions and 2 CWP No.10600 of 2024, decided alongwith connected matters on 06.01.2025 - 4 - accordingly same are allowed with a direction to respondent Nos. 1 and 2 to place the matter before the Empowered Committee chaired by Secretary, DIPP, constituted in terms of Clause 6.1 of the Scheme, for registration expeditiously, preferably within a period of four weeks, without being influenced by letters dated 9.11.2023 and 30.07.2024. Needless to say, petitioners shall be granted incentives, as prayed for, in terms of the Scheme, if they are found eligible. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. Interim order, if any, is vacated.” 5. It is not in dispute that the lis in this case, has already been adjudicated upon in Atul Sharma’s2 case. Consequently the directions issued in Atul Sharma’s2 case shall mutatis mutandis apply to the case of the petitioner as well. The respondents shall implement the directions issued in Atul Sharma’s2 case to the case of the petitioner without being influenced by the fact that under communication dated 15.10.2024 (Annexure P-14), the status of petitioner’s application on DPIIT portal for registration has been reflected as “Closed”. - 5 - The writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms, so also pending miscellaneous application(s), if any. Jyotsna Rewal Dua Judge March 22, 2025 R.Atal