Goradia Special Steels Ltd vs The State Of Maharashtra Through Its ... on 18 September, 2019
If that was permitted to be availed of by another
company, Universal Ferro and Allied Chemicals, Bhandara, then,
the same facility or concession be extended to the Petitioner. All that
the communication dated 22nd June 2017 says is that the
Respondents Nos. 3 and 4 should inform the State as to what it has
done pursuant to the earlier communication of 24th April 2017. We
Page 21 of 27
18th September 2019
::: Uploaded on - 26/09/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 19/04/2020 09:21:27 :::
Goradia Special Steels Ltd v State Of Maharashtra & Ors
901-ASWPL14761-19-J.DOC
are, therefore, not in agreement with Mr Aney that the Amnesty
Scheme 'stood extended' and only for the Petitioner and to enable it
to avail of the benefts underlying it. That cannot be said to be
continued beyond the stipulated period and no amount of reliance
on even the communications from Respondents Nos. 3 and 4 can be
of any assistance. The later Scheme of the State Government
contained in the Government Resolution dated 6th May 2016 is not
the applicable one. This fact is not disputed at all. It is a distinct
Scheme. It is the Scheme of 2007 which is relied upon. That is not
absolute but conditional. Its terms are not questioned ever.