Naval S/O Nandlal Agrawal, Proprietor of M/S Naval Agro and Food Products, Akola Vs the Managing Director and Office Incharge, Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation, Mumbai

in the year 2012, was considered, and it was proposed that the petitioner may be offered a plot, provided that he produces a memorandum of understanding with the District Industrial Center.

¶16

Petitioner has in paragraph no.4 of his petition has stated that he attended the meeting on 21.11.2012. It is the case of respondent MIDC, that the petitioner was informed to produce memorandum

¶17

Order

¶18

2801wp5033.17

¶19

2

¶20

of understanding, but, he failed to produce the same, and therefore, the offer letter was not issued to him. This is denied by the learned Counsel for the petitioner, who submits that there was no such communication received from the respondents to bring memorandum of understanding.

¶21

We are not entering into the controversy as to whether such memorandum of understanding was demanded or not. The fact remains that from 2012 to 2016, the petitioner has been making correspondence with the authorities concern, but, has not approached this Court. It is now informed to us that only three plots are now lying vacant, and the same has been advertised, and the petitioner is at liberty to participate in the auction.

¶22

In view of this, we do not find any reason to entertain this petition. The same is dismissed. No

¶23

costs.

¶24

JUDGE JUDGE

¶25

Rgd.

Naval S/O Nandlal Agrawal, Proprietor of M/S Naval Agro and Food Products, Akola v. the Managing Director and Office Incharge, Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation, Mumbai

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Naval S/O Nandlal Agrawal, Proprietor of M/S Naval Agro and Food Products, Akola v. the Managing Director and Office Incharge, Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation, Mumbai

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Fago Sampat Ukey Vs the State of Maharashtra, Urban Development Dept., Mumbai Thr. Its Principal and Others

Mirza Zafar Baig Mirza Akhtar Baig Vs the State of Maharashtra, Thr. Its Secretary, Rural Development Dept., Mumbai and Another

Shri Bhushan S/O Shankarrao Dadwe and Others Vs Shri Basant Lall Shaw and Others

Atc Telecom Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Mumbai Vs Nagpur Municipal Corporation, Nagpur Thr. Commissioner and Others

Atc Telecom Infradtructure Pvt. Ltd. (Formerly Known as Viom Networks Limited) Vs Amravati Municipal Corposration Thr. Its Commissioner and Others

Atc Telecom Infrastructure Private Ltd. (Formerly Known as Viom Networks Ltd) Vs Chandrapur Municipal Corporation Thr. Its Commissioner and Ors.