Order Heard Mr. G. C. Bharuka for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader No. VI on behalf of the State. 2. The petitioner has prayed for grant of subsidy to it in accordance with the incentive offered by the State Government as contained in notification No. 1153 dated 20.1.1981 (Annexure 1) taking the value of the land of the firm also into account for the purpose of calculating quantum of subsidy. The entire rub is in respect of the value of the assets of the firm. The State authorities in the Industries department are of the view that the value of the land owned by the firm cannot be taken into account for assessing the value of the assets of the firm for the purpose of grant of subsidy. The stand of the State is that since the land has been contributed by one of the partners of the firm which had been purchased by the said partner prior to 1971, the land cannot form part of the assets of the firm for the purpose of grant of subsidy. 3. We regret, the view of the State Government is entirely misconceived. Whether the land was purchased after 1971 or prior to 1971 is absolutely immaterial. The question is of the value of the assets of the firm at the time the firm applied for subsidy. It cannot be doubted that the land was contributed by one of the partners of the firm. That partner got a share in the benefits of the firm. It is, therefore, obvious that the land owned by the firm would be an asset of the firm which should be taken into account for the purpose of grant of subsidy. 4. This application is, therefore, allowed accordingly. The State Government in the Industries Department will grant subsidy to the petitioner on the total assets of the firm including the value of the land. However, there will be no order as to costs.