Patna High Court
M/s Patna Board Boxes Industries,versusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- A ABHISHEK REDDY
Holding
The court directed the respondents to process the petitioner’s subsidy application, give notice for any further documents, and issue a decision within twelve weeks.
Summary
M/s Patna Board Boxes Industries filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing the State of Bihar to implement the Bihar Industrial Incentive Policy, 2011 and to release pending VAT/SGST reimbursement claims filed in July 2023. The petitioner argued that it had submitted all required documents, but the respondents contended that the subsidy could not be granted due to alleged missing paperwork. The petitioner later furnished the additional documents on 31‑10‑2025. The court examined whether the authorities were obligated to process the subsidy application once the investment proposal was accepted under the policy. It held that the respondents must evaluate the petitioner's application, give notice if further documents are needed, and pass a decision within twelve weeks. Accordingly, the writ petition was disposed with directions to the authorities to act expeditiously.
Issues considered
- Whether the State authorities are bound to implement the Bihar Industrial Incentive Policy, 2011 and release the pending VAT/SGST reimbursement to the petitioner.
- Whether the respondents can lawfully withhold or discontinue the subsidy after the petitioner’s investment proposal has been accepted.
- Whether a writ of mandamus is the appropriate remedy to compel the authorities to process the subsidy application.
Subjects
- Industrial subsidy
- Writ of mandamus
- Bihar Industrial Incentive Policy 2011
- VAT reimbursement
- SGST reimbursement
- High Court writ jurisdiction
- Industrial policy implementation
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.3141 of 2025
======================================================
M/s Patna Board Boxes Industries, having its office at Mahadev Asthan, Near
Bypass Thana, Marcha Marchi Road, Patna-800009 through its Authorized
Representative Subhash Kumar Boobna, aged about 47 years (Male), Son of
Gajendra Kumar Boobna, Resident of Adrakh Ghat, Maroof Ganj, Patna City,
PS- Malsalami, District- Patna.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through Secretary, Department of Industry, Government
of Bihar, Patna.
2. The Secretary, Department of Industry, Government of Bihar, Patna.
3. The State Investment Promotion Board, through its Nodal Officer, Director
Technical, Department of Industry, Government of Bihar, Patna.
4. Commissioner-cum-Secretary, Department of State Taxes, Government of
Bihar, Patna.
5. Director, Industries, Department of Industry, Government of Bihar, Patna.
6. The Director (Technical), Department of Industry, Government of Bihar.
7. The General Manager, District Industries Centre, Patna.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Abhishek Kumar, Adv.
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Government Pleader (07)
For the State : Mr. Vivek Pd, Adv.
Ms. Roona, Adv.
Mr. Sanjay Kr., Adv.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A. ABHISHEK REDDY
ORAL ORDER
4 31-01-2026 Heard the learned counsel for the parties.
2. This writ petition has been filed for the following
relief(s):-
“i. For issuing a writ of mandamus
or any other appropriate writ directing the
Respondent Authorities to implement the Bihar
Industrial Incentive Policy, 2011 and thereby
pay the entitlement of the Petitioner, under the
Patna High Court CWJC No.3141 of 2025(4) dt.31-01-2026
2/3
head of VAT/SGST Reimbursement made vide
Application Nos INC202307001005,
INC202307001009, INC2023070010 14,
INC202307001235 which are pending since
July, 2023.
ii. For holding that the Respondents
cannot withhold/discontinue to subsidize and/or
reimbursement the entitlements accorded to the
Petitioner under the Bihar Industrial Incentive
Policy, 2011.
iii. For holding that once the
proposal of the investment has been accepted
and petitioner is declared entitled under the
Policy, then the Respondents cannot interfere
with the disbursal of the reimbursement/subsidy
amount to the Petitioner.”
3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner submits that in the counter affidavit filed by the
respondents, the authorities have taken a stand that the Industrial
Subsidy under Industrial Incentive Policy, 2011 has not been
granted to the petitioner as the petitioner has not submitted the
requisite documents. Learned counsel submits that the petitioner
has subsequently furnished all the requisite documents and it
would suffice for the moment if the authorities are directed to
evaluate the application made by the petitioner duly taking into
consideration the documents filed by him and pass necessary
orders for granting the industrial subsidy as per the provisions
Patna High Court CWJC No.3141 of 2025(4) dt.31-01-2026
3/3
under the Industrial Incentive Policy, 2011.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
respondent State submits that the petitioner has submitted the
documents on 31.10.2025 and has also annexed.
5. Having regard to the above made submissions, the
present writ petition is disposed of directing the authorities to
process the application of the petitioner duly taking into
consideration the documents submitted by him. In case the
authority is of the view that any further documents are required,
the petitioner shall be put on notice and given an opportunity of
filing the same. The authority shall endeavour to pass necessary
orders as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of
twelve weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of this order.
Any decision taken by the authority shall be communicated to
the party.
6. With the above directions, the present writ petition
stands disposed of.
(A. Abhishek Reddy , J)
Gauravkr/-
U
Checking your session…