Entitlement to Industrial Development Scheme incentives cannot be restricted to registered units without individual case examination by the Empowered Committee.

The petitioner, a company that installed a solar power plant in District Pauri Garhwal, sought to avail incentives under the Industrial Development Scheme, 2017.

Despite initiating correspondence for registration and investing significant capital, the Union of India (Respondents 1 and 2) issued communications dated 30.07.2024 and 09.11.2023, stating that benefits would only extend to units already registered under the scheme, excluding unregistered units.

The petitioner challenged these communications, asserting that the issue was already adjudicated by the High Court of Himachal Pradesh in favor of similarly situated industrial units.

1. Whether the benefit of the Industrial Development Scheme, 2017, can be restricted exclusively to registered units, thereby excluding units that had applied for registration but remained unregistered.

2. Whether the petitioner’s case is squarely covered by the precedent set by the High Court of Himachal Pradesh regarding the validity of the impugned communications.

The court relied on the precedent established by the High Court of Himachal Pradesh in *Union of India and another v. Atul Sharma and others* (LPA No. 169 of 2025), which holds that matters of registration for industrial incentives must be considered individually by a designated authority.

It further applied Clause 6.1 of the policy of the Department of Industrial Policy and Promotion (D.I.P.P.), which mandates that the Empowered Committee, chaired by the Secretary of D.I.P.P., is the competent body to examine such cases.

The Court observed that the impugned communications dated 30.07.2024 and 09.11.2023, which sought to deny benefits to unregistered units, had already been set aside by a Single Bench and a Division Bench of the Himachal Pradesh High Court, a decision that attained finality at the Supreme Court.

During the proceedings, the Central Government Standing Counsel (C.G.S.C.) conceded that the current writ petitions involved the same subject matter and legal questions as the Himachal Pradesh cases.

Consequently, the Court determined that the petitioner’s eligibility for incentives should not be summarily dismissed based on the impugned communications but must instead be evaluated on an individual basis by the Empowered Committee as per the scheme’s procedural framework.

It directed the Empowered Committee, chaired by the Secretary of D.I.P.P., to separately consider each petitioner's case for the grant of incentives under the Industrial Development Scheme, 2017.

This exercise is to be completed within a period of four months from the date of production of the certified copy of the order.