IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.12768 of 2009 M/S LUMBINI BEVERAGES PVT.LTD., HAJIPUR INDUSTRIAL AREA, HAJIPUR THROUGH ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, GANESH PRASAD SINGH, SON OF LATE JADU NANDAN SINGH, RESIDENT OF MAHESH NAGAR, P.S. PATLIPUTRA, TOWN & DISTRICT – PATNA. ... ... PETITIONER. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR, THROUGH THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, ENERGY DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA. 2. THE BIHAR STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD THROUGH ITS CHAIRMAN, VIDYUT BHAVAN, BAILEY ROAD, PATNA. 3. THE GENERAL MANAGER-CUM-CHIEF ENGINEER,TIRHUT AREA ELECTRIC SUPPLY, TIRHUT DIVISION, MUZAFFARPUR. 4. THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, MUZAFFARPUR ELECTRIC CIRCLE, MUZAFFARPUR. 5. THE ELECTRICAL EXECUTIVE ENGINEER(COMMERCIAL & REVENUE), MUZAFFARPUR ELECTRIC CIRCLE, MUZAFFARPUR. ... ... RESPONDENTS. ----------- 2. 8.10.2009. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Bihar State Electricity Board and the State of Bihar. Petitioner is an Industrial Unit engaged in manufacture of beverages. The unit filed this writ petition asserting that unit is entitled to grant of exemption from payment of annual/ monthly minimum guarantee charges in the light of the provisions contained in Sub Paragraph 12 of Paragraph 2 of the Industrial Policy 2006 with effect from the date indicated in the policy i.e. 1.4.2006 as the said policy has not only been - 2 - notified by the State of Bihar under Notification dated 27.7.2006 and corrigendum dated 29.2.2006 (Annexures 3 and 3/1) but also accepted by the Board under instructions bearing letter no.678 dated 7.10.2006 (Annexure-4). It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that inspite of issue of notification/ instruction accepting the industrial policy, the authorities of the Board are not considering the case of the petitioner for grant of exemption from payment of annual/ monthly minimum guarantee with effect form the date of the industrial policy i.e. 1.4.2006. Learned counsel for the Board submitted that the petitioner unit came into production in the year 1998 and as the unit came in production in the year 1998 is not entitled to grant of exemption. Such submission of the counsel for the Board appears to be prima facie misconceived in view of the clear mandate of the industrial policy which has already been notified by the energy department of the State Government as also accepted by the authorities of the Board - 3 - N.H./ under letter dated 7.10.2006. This Court however without expressing any opinion in the matter direct the competent authority of the Board namely the Chief Engineer Commercial to consider the request of the petitioner for grant of exemption in the light of the industrial policy duly notified by the State Government under notification (Annexures 3 and 3/1) as also accepted by the Board under instructions contained in letter dated 7.10.2006 (Annexure-4) in accordance with law as early as possible in any case within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. In the event, the competent authority considers it appropriate that petitioner is entitled to grant of exemption the order granting exemption by adjusting the amount be also issued within the same time. ( V.N. Sinha,J.)