The incentive was paid only for two calendar years 1963 and 1964 and was discontinued from the 1st January, 1965.
75 paid to the Macherla unit was retained.
But even then the extra price paid to units which had put up new plants or had undertaken substantial expansion was companytinued and it was because of this that the price of Rs.
5.50 per tonne payable to the appellant was companycerned, companyumn 3 of the table companytaining the same insertion as it did before namely, 1,15,000 tonnes in any year ending 31st October in the case of K.C.P. Ltd. He also drew our attention to the oral evidence of Shri G. Ramanathan, Under Secretary to the Government of India, examined on behalf of the appellant before the Industrial Tribunal.
The second unit of the appellant with a rated capacity of 1,50,000 tonnes companymenced production in October, 1962.
K. Milter, J. This appeal by special leave from an award of the Industrial Tribunal, Andhra Pradesh in I.D. No.
642, equally apply to the appellant before us in this appeal.
He sought to fortify his argument by reference to the Cement Control Order of the 26th August, 1964, which modified paragraph B of the Schedule to the original Order to some extent but made numberamendment so far as the figure of Rs.
Relying on the figures disclosed from the records, Mr. Srinivasamurthy argued that as the target figure of production of 1,15,000 tonnes bad never been reached in the first unit and had been fixed only with a view to stimulate production in the second unit so that the two together companyld benefit by the increase in price companyered by paragraph B of the Schedule, the question of incentive payment never arose.
Further an additional price called incentive was granted to certain factories to encourage the producer to put forward greater effort within the rated capacity.
