Judgment :- (1) In the writ petition, the petitioner a private limited company under the Companies Act, 1956 has challenged the order dated 14th July, 2008 passed by the Director, Policy Planning Unit and Ex-Officio Special Secretary, Finance (Revenue) Department, Government of West Bengal, the respondent No.1 rejecting the application of the petitioner for financial assistance under the West Bengal Industrial Promotion (Assistance to Industrial Units) Scheme, 1994 on the ground of delay. It has been contended that pursuant to the scheme the petitioner is supposed to file the application for financial assistance with the designated authority within four months from the end of the quarter in question. Accordingly, on 27th April, 2004 the petitioner had dropped the application in the drop box seeking financial assistance with regard to the quarter ending on 31st December, 2003. It has been submitted since it was dropped in the drop box within the time as stipulated and as there was no delay in furnishing the application the order dated 14th July, 2008 passed by the respondent No.1, is not sustainable. (2) Learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the State respondents submits that even assuming the petitioner had dropped the application in the drop box on 27th April, 2004 he could have also filed the application with the assessing authority and since it was not done, the order under challenge is just and proper. (3) The question is whether the petitioner had filed the application on 27th April, 2004 in the drop box. (4) In my view, when the respondent authorities have instituted a procedure for receiving the application by filing it in the drop box and when the petitioner on oath has stated that on 27th April, 2004 he had dropped the application in the drop box, one cannot deny the fact of such deposit and, thus, the respondents are precluded from denying the fact of such filing on the said date. One as to accept the statement that the application was dropped on that day, that is, 27th April, 2004 in the drop box as it appears that there was no procedure for granting receipt for filing such application. One as to accept the statement that the application was dropped on that day, that is, 27th April, 2004 in the drop box as it appears that there was no procedure for granting receipt for filing such application. The observation of the respondent No.1 in the order impugned that the registered dealer could have filed the application before the appropriate assessing authority is at best an option and when the respondent authorities kept a drop box for receiving the application and there is no denial by the respondents that it was dropped it has to be presumed that the application was dropped rn time. Therefore, the order under challenge passed by the respondent No.1 cannot be sustained and is, thus, set aside and quashed. (5) The writ petition is allowed. (6) There will be no order as to costs.