Madras High Court
WP(MD)/19684/2026 of M/s.Vijayalaxmi Polymers Vs The General Manager on 11 November 2026
WP(MD) No. 19684 of 2026
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 11-11-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SENTHILKUMAR
RAMAMOORTHY
WP(MD) No. 19684 of 2026
CNR:{HCMD010937192026}
M/s.Vijayalaxmi Polymers
Partnership Firm Represented through its Partner, B.Gurusankar
..Petitioner(s)
Vs
The General Manager
District Industrial Centre,
Palayamkottai,
Tirunelveli - 627 011.
..Respondent(s)
PRAYER: Writ Petition, filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records relating to the impugned order of the respondent in Na.Ka.No. 2594/A4/2023 dated 08.10.2024 and quash the same and consequently direct the respondent to pay the compensation-seeking relief package to the petitioner’s unit based upon the petitioner’s applications dated 06.06.2023 and 02.05.2024.
For Petitioner(s)
:Mr.H.Arumugam
For Respondent(s)
:Mr.P.Pethu Rajesh
Additional Government Pleader
WP(MD) No. 19684 of 2026
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
Under G.O.(Ms).No.84, Environment and Forests (EC.2) Department, dated 25.06.2018, the manufacture, storage, supply, transportation, sale and distribution of ‘use and throwaway plastics’ was banned. Pursuant to representations submitted by Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises, the persons affected by the aforesaid ban on ‘use and throwaway plastics’ were granted relief under G.O.(Ms)No.74, Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises (D2) Department, dated 24.11.2020. G.O.(Ms) No.74 was modified by G.O.(Ms) No.17, Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises (D2) Department, dated 15.03.2023.
2. Asserting that the petitioner was engaged in the manufacture of ‘use and throwaway plastics’ and was consequently affected by the ban, the petitioner applied for relief under above-mentioned Government Orders of the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises (MSME) Department. The request for relief was declined under impugned communication dated 08.10.2024.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned communication was issued without providing a reasonable opportunity to the petitioner to establish that machinery for the manufacture of single- use plastics was purchased by availing of credit facilities and that the ban
WP(MD) No. 19684 of 2026 had caused substantial financial losses.
4. In response, Mr.P.Pethu Rajesh, learned Additional Government Pleader, submits that relief was extended only to MSME units that shut down on account of the ban. Relying on the counter affidavit, he points out that the petitioner’s request was rejected on the basis of documents and information provided by the petitioner, such as Udhayam portal data, EB connection readings, bank letters.
5. In relevant part, G.O.(Ms) No.74 records as under: “6. Based on the above announcement, the Industries Commissioner and Director of Industries and Commerce has stated that as per the particulars furnished by the General Manager / Regional Joint Director, regarding the Plastic Units closed consequent to the ban on one time use and throwaway plastics, it is estimated that 166 MSMEs were engaged in manufacture of banned 'one time use and throwaway plastics' either by availing financial assistance from banks or with their own funds. 138 MSMEs had availed loan from financial institutions and the outstanding loan as on date is Rs.2947.93 lakhs.
7. The Industries Commissioner and Director of Industries and Commerce has therefore requested the Government to issue orders approving the relief package proposed for the MSMEs affected due to ban order issued in G.O. (Ms.) No.84, Environment and Forests (EC.2) Department, dated 25-06-2018 banning use of certain types of plastics.
WP(MD) No. 19684 of 2026
8. The Government after careful examination decided to accept the proposal of the Industries Commissioner and Director of Industries and Commerce and accordingly issue orders for sanction of relief package for the MSMEs affected due to ban on use of certain types of plastics with mode of relief and the modalities for sanction of relief as below: Mode of Relief …
iv) This relief shall be made applicable only to the loan accounts of those entrepreneurs who were regular in repayment as on the date of issue of Government order banning use of certain types of plastics or as on date of making application seeking relief under this relief package scheme.” Thus, relief was extended by accepting the proposal of the Industries Commissioner and Director of Industries and Commerce. Said proposal was in relation to plastic units closed consequent to the ban.
6. In the impugned order, two reasons are set out for rejecting the petitioner’s claim for relief. The first reason is that the petitioner has continued to operate. The petitioner does not controvert this conclusion. The second reason mentioned therein is that the bank account of the petitioner discloses that the petitioner is operating successfully and that the petitioner cannot be considered as an affected unit.
7. When viewed in the context of a relief package intended for
WP(MD) No. 19684 of 2026 units that had to shut down on account of the ban on the use of single-use plastics, I find no infirmity in the impugned order warranting interference in judicial review.
8. With these observations, this Writ Petition is disposed of by declining to grant the relief requested. There shall be no order as to costs. 11-11-2026 Index: Yes/No (2/2) Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No apd
WP(MD) No. 19684 of 2026 SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY, J. apd WP(MD) No. 19684 of 2026 11-11-2026 (2/2)