Petitioner sought cancellation of land allotment for non-completion of industry. Court quashed impugned orders allowing six months to revive the unit based on precedent and undertaking.
The impugned orders cancelling the allotment are quashed; the respondent is directed to allow six months to revive the industry.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.9212 of 2011
=========================================================== Sarvashree Pundra Herbs, Maranga Growth Centre, Purnea Through its Proprietor Seema Kumari W/O Sri Mahendra Prasad R/O Sharda Nagar, Purnea-K.Hat, Distt.Purnea
.... .... Petitioner/s Versus
.... .... Respondent/s
=========================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Siya Ram Sahi Mr. RANJAN KUMAR SINGH For the BIADA Mr. Piush Lall
=========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KISHORE KUMAR MANDAL ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 11-12-2015
Heard Mr. Siya Ram Sahi for the petitioner and Mr. Piyush Lall for
the respondent-Bihar Industrial Development Authority (for short „the BIADA‟).
The petitioner was allotted on the recommendation by the competent Committee of the respondent-BIADA 50 decimals of land on 26.06.2004 for setting up an industrial unit/industry. The possession of the land was filed on 17.09.2006. Since the petitioner did not set up/establish the industry, the respondent-BIADA issued notice (Annexure-7) to show cause as to why the allotment of the land in question be not cancelled. A reply thereto was given on 09.08.2008 by the petitioner-industrial unit. Respondent-BIADA after sometime again issued a notice on 03.09.2009 (Annexure-9) calling upon the petitioner to
Patna High Court CWJC No.9212 of 2011 dt.11-12-2015
2/3
submit a show cause against the proposed cancellation of the allotment of the plot/land in question. A reply thereto was filed. The respondent-BIADA by order dated 17.12.2009 (Annexure-1/1) under the orders of the Managing Director, cancelled the allotment of the plot/land of the petitioner. Aggrieved thereby, an appeal was filed by the petitioner which was also considered and rejected by order dated 15.03.2000 (Annexure-1). These two orders have been impugned in this writ application.
Mr. Sahi with reference to the averments made in the writ petition has explained the circumstances under which the petitioner could not set up/establish the industry and make it functional for which sincere efforts were made. It is stated that the licence to run the industrial unit/industry was given on 25.04.2011. After valiant efforts, the electric connection was given to the industry/industrial unit in the year 2015. In the light of the order passed by a division bench of this Court in LPA No. 353 of 2008 such industrial unit is required to be given six months time to revive the industrial unit and start production.
This Court called upon the BIADA to make local inspection of the unit claimed to have been set up by the petitioner on the plot/land of the BIADA and file an affidavit. In the light of the said order a supplementary counter affidavit has been filed annexing therewith two reports (Annexure-C and D). On perusal thereof, it appears that the unit was not totally abandoned. The entrepreneur(s) was found making effort to revive the unit and some industrial activities were going on the plot/land.
A supplementary affidavit has been filed on behalf of the petitioner. In paragraph 5 thereof the following has been stated:-
Patna High Court CWJC No.9212 of 2011 dt.11-12-2015
3/3
unit will be in full commercial production of manufacturing Ayurvedic Medicine.”
Considering the submissions of the parties and the order which this Court passed on somewhat identical fact situation in LPA No. 353 of 2008 and its analogous LPAa as also the undertaking of the petitioner, this Court disposes of this writ application by directing the respondent BIADA to allow six months time to the petitioner to revive the industry and make the same operational/functional failing which the respondent BIADA shall be entitled to cancel the allotment after giving notice and settle the same with the desirous applicant(s)/entrepreneur(s) in accordance with law. The impugned orders (Annexure-1 and 1/1) are quashed and set aside.
(Kishore Kumar Mandal, J)
HR/-
U
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner was entitled to a reprieve to revive the industrial unit instead of immediate cancellation of land allotment.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
LPA No. 353 of 2008Relied on¶15
Sarvashree Pundra Herbs
Bihar Industrial Area Development Authority
Kishore Kumar Mandal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
