HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY Writ Petition No.18159 of 2005 ORDER: In this writ petition, the petitioner seeks directions by way of writ of Mandamus to declare the action of the respondents in not extending the benefit of 25% rebate on land cost in terms of the orders issued by the Government in G.O.Ms.No.178, dated 21.06.2005, and in insisting payment of 25% land cost also vide letter No.6538/IDA/ptc-PH-1/2005, dated 05.8.2005, as illegal and arbitrary and consequently, to direct the respondents to extend the benefit of rebate as referred to above. The first respondent-Government has notified Industrial Investment Promotion Policy for the period 2005-2010 vide G.O.Ms.No.178, Industries and Commerce (IP) Department, dated 21.06.2005. As per the incentives notified in the said policy, one of the incentives notified under Clause-3.1.4 is 25% rebate on land cost in Industrial Estates/Industrial Development Areas, limited to Rs.5,00,000/-. The petitioner with an intention to establish an Industrial Unit in Industrial Development Area i.e., Phase-I at Patancheru, he applied to the Andhra Pradesh Industrial Infrastructure Corporation Limited (APIIC) for allotment of a plot. On his application, he was allotted plot No.17-B (part) in Phase-I, IDA, Patancheru, admeasuring about 2949.15 sq.meters, and the cost of the plot was worked out at Rs.13,27,118/-. The petitioner has paid substantial portion of the sale consideration, but he has not paid an amount of Rs.3,31,779/- on the ground that there is incentive notified by the Government vide G.O.Ms.No.178, dated 21.06.2005. When respondent Nos.2 and 3 were issuing notices demanding payment of the balance amount, the petitioner claims to have replied stating that in view of the incentive policy notified by the Government, he is entitled to rebate to an extent of 25% on the land cost and as such, he need not pay the amount. In spite of such stand of the petitioner, as the respondents are insisting for payment of the balance 25% towards land cost with interest, he approached this Court and filed this writ petition. On behalf of the respondents, counter and additional counter affidavits are filed, wherein it is stated that subsequent to notifying the Industrial Investment Promotion Policy vide G.O.Ms.No.178, dated 21.06.2005, the first respondent-Government issued operational guidelines vide G.O.Ms.No.378, Industries and Commerce, dated 13.12.2005, for implementation of the scheme enunciated in the said G.O. A special reference is made to Clause 5.2.0 of the operational guidelines issued in G.O.Ms.No.328. It is apt to refer to relevant clause in the said operational guidelines, which reads as under: 5.2.0 Rebate on land cost in IEs/IDA’s: 5.2.1 All eligible industrial units shall submit their claims prescribed application form given at Annexure-III for Rebate on land cost within six months from the date of commencement of commercial production, to the General Manager, District Industries Centre concerned. 5.2.2 25% rebate on land cost in IE/IDA’s limited to Rs.5.00 lakhs. 5.2.3 The above benefit shall be applicable to all eligible new industrial units and Expansion/Diversification Projects. 5.2.4 The above benefit shall be provided on purchase of land directly from APIIC only. 5.2.5 The above benefits shall be admissible upto five times of the plinth area of the factory building constructed within the approved project cost. However, in respect of industries where the open land requirements would be large due to the peculiar nature of industry, SLC may consider allowing land in excess of 5 times plinth area on case to case basis. From the aforesaid operational guidelines, it is clear that all eligible industrial units have to make their applications in prescribed form for Rebate on land cost within six months from the commencement of commercial production, to the General Manager, District Industries Centre concerned. The benefit is restricted to five times of the plinth area of the factory building constructed within the approved project cost. It is also made clear that for the land in respect of industries where the open land requirements would be large due to peculiar nature of industry, State Level Committees is empowered to consider allowing land in excess of five times plinth area. In this case, it is submitted that as the petitioner did not make any application, there was no occasion to consider his case. A comprehensive reading of the Industrial Investment Promotion Policy notified vide G.O.Ms.No.178, dated 21.06.2005, and the operational guidelines vide G.O.Ms.No.328, dated 13.12.2005, makes it clear that the Industrial Units, which are claiming rebate of 25% have to make an application in prescribed form to the notified authority. Even without making any application, the petitioner cannot plead for adjustment of the said amount with the APIIC on the ground that he is entitled to such rebate in terms of G.O.Ms.No.178, dated 21.06.2005. However, it is to be noted that the operational guidelines vide G.O.Ms.No.328, dated 13.12.2005, have been issued during the pendency of the writ petition. Inasmuch as there is no claim made by the petitioner in terms of the operational guidelines and in the absence of such claim and scrutiny for the purpose of grant of rebate by the authority concerned, no directions can be given straightaway by this Court for grant of rebate as claimed by the petitioner. Inasmuch as the operational guidelines have been notified after filing of the writ petition and it is the case of the petitioner that his case fits into the scheme of the respondents, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition leaving it open to the petitioner to file a claim application before the General Manager, District Industries Centre concerned, within a period of six weeks from today and if any such claim application is filed within the time stipulated hereinabove by complying with all the requirements in terms of the operational guidelines, I am sure the authority concerned shall consider and decide the same on its own merits. Subject to the above, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. _____________________ (R. SUBHASH REDDY, J) Dt.26.08.2010 Note: Issue CC in one week. (b/o) VGB