Orissa High Court (Through Hybrid Mode) vs Micro And Small Enterprise .... ... on 7 April, 2022 W.P.(C) No.21943 Of 2016 (Through hybrid mode) M/S. JSW Steel Ltd .... Petitioner Mr. Y. Das Senior Advocate with Mr. R.Roy, Advocate versus Micro And Small Enterprise .... Opposite parties. Facilitation Council and others Mr. S.P.Mishra, Senior Advocate For O.P.2 ORDER 07.04.2022 Order No. 28. 1. Petitioner has moved Court praying that proceedings initiated by opposite party no.1 under section 18 in Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006 (MSEFC Case no.17 of 2014) and award dated 28th June, 2016, be quashed and set aside. The writ petition was heard by this Bench on a few occasions. 2. Mr. Das, learned senior advocate appears on behalf of petitioner and had earlier submitted, challenge in the writ petition is directed against the proceeding, concluded by award dated 28th June, 2016 in arbitration reference under the Act. Short point is that award holder cannot be said to be a supplier within meaning of clause (n) in Page 1 of 14 // 2 // definitions section (2). Subclause (ii) under clause (a) in subsection (1) of section 7 limits enterprises, such as award holder, in being called a small enterprise, to those whose investment on plant and machinery is more than Rs.25 lakhs but does not exceed Rs.5 crores. He referred to pages 110 and 111 of the writ petition to show from schedule of fixed assets of opposite party no.2 (supplier), it had plant and machinery as on 1st April, 2010 at Rs.6.54 crores and the same as on 1st April, 2011 at Rs.5.47 crores. This is relevant information in relation to the claim for payment made and forwarded as a demand under the Act by said opposite party. 3. Mr. Mishra, learned senior advocate appears on behalf of opposite party no.2 and was heard on 7th December, 2021, when he had submitted that his client has three units. The unit situated at Khurda has been assessed to be a Small Manufacturing Enterprise by the committee formed as per decision of the government in Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises (MSME) Department. The committee, on 30th March, 2015 certified the status of his client's said unit. The document is annexure A/2 in the preliminary counter filed by his client, appearing at running page 266. His client had filed additional affidavit reply on behalf of his client to bring on record fact of his client having three separate units, as aforesaid, one in Khurda. Page 2 of 14 // 3 // 4. He submitted further, all supplies were made to petitioner from the unit at Khurda. The supplies were made by his client in years 2009 to 2013. His client had certification as on 6th May, 2008 for the Khurda Unit, being disclosure in the writ petition at page 75. The order for supply is dated 30th June, 2009 and the supplies were made pursuant thereto, as completed in year 2013. 5. On 4th March, 2022 hearing of the writ petition was on circulars dated 29th September, 2015 and 3rd March, 2016. Relevant text from order dated 4th March, 2022 is reproduced below. "2. Mr. Das, learned senior advocate appears on behalf of petitioner and draws attention to two documents disclosed under memo dated 11th January, 2022, filed by opposite party no.2. The first is circular dated 29th September, 2015, issued by Additional Development Commissioner (Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises). Text of the circular is reproduced below. "The matter regarding clubbing of various enterprises (whether located in the same district or in various districts of the state/country) under the same ownership have been examined by this office. 2. The competent Authority, after