Court No. - 4
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 14902 of 2018 Petitioner :- Niranjan Taparia Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Man Mohan Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Anuj Pratap Singh,Hari Nath Tripathi
Hon'ble Bala Krishna Narayana,J. Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the State/respondent no. 1, Sri Prabhakar Awasthi, learned counsel appearing for the respondent nos. 2 and 3 and Sri H.N. Tripathi, learned counsel for respondent no. 4.
This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with the following prayer :-
(A) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 1.8.2017 issued by the respondent no. 3, whereby making demand of time extension fee contrary to the clause 6(a) of the allotment letter and provisions of the Chapter-8 Operating Manual (Industrial Area) (Annexure No. 7 to the writ petition).
(B) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding and directing the respondents to extend the time for establishing industrial unit over the plot No. J-41 INDL, Sector D-I, Industrial Area Tronica City at Delhi Saharanpur Road, Tronica City Loni, Ghaziabad only taking time extension fee at the rate as provided under Clause 6(a) of the allotment letter and provisions of the Chapter-8 of Operating Manual (Industrial Area).
(C) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding and directing the respondents to maintain specific standard and increase the adequate hydraulic capacity of Common Effluent Treatment Plant (CETP) and provide membership to the petitioner, whereby he can get No Objection Certificate, from the U.P. Pollution Control Board for running his industrial unit.
(D) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding and directing the respondents to take suitable decision on the applications of the petitioner, which is pending before him.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that Plot No. J-41 INDL, Sector D-I, situate in Tronica City Loni, Ghaziabad hereinafter referred to as the plot in question, was allotted by the respondent no. 4 in favour of Smt. Kiran Kalra by allotment letter dated 4.1.2007 for setting up an Industrial Unit for manufacturing Dying and Bleaching powder. Since the initial allottee could not establish her Unit, the petitioner, who was desirous of setting up a small Industrial Unit of Textile Dying moved an application before UPSIDC with a prayer that initial allottee may be permitted to transfer the plot in question to the petitioner. On the basis of application dated 20.11.2017 moved before the authorities by the initial allottee under Clause 6.06 of Operating Manual (Industrial Area) of UPSIDC with the prayer to transfer the plot in question in favour of petitioner, the plot in question was allotted to the petitioner by letter dated 17.12.2008 (Annexure No. 3 to the writ petition). After allotment of the plot in question in his favour, the petitioner claims that he deposited entire amount mentioned in the aforesaid allotment/permission letter.
It is further submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that since UPSIDC failed to provide the necessary infrastructure for establishing and running industrial unit by the petitioner on the plot in question, the Pollution Control Board has not issued the required 'No Objection Certificate' till date and it was on account of aforesaid fact that the petitioner could not establish and start his Unit on the plot allotted to him within a stipulated period of two years. Accordingly, he moved an application before the respondent no. 3 for extension of time to establish his Unit. However, UPSIDC issued the impugned notice requiring the petitioner to deposit Rs. 55,65,984/- before him as a condition precedent for extending time for the petitioner to establish his industrial Unit.
It is next submitted that the amount which the petitioner has now been required to pay to the respondent no. 3 mentioned in the impugned notice for getting an extension for establishing his industrial Unit is not only arbitrary but the same also does not disclose any basis. Moreover, before issuing the impugned notice, the respondent no. 3 had not afforded any opportunity to the petitioner and hence the impugned notice is liable to be quashed.
Per contra, Sri Prabhakar Awasthi, learned counsel for respondent no. 3 has submitted that the petitioner himself is responsible for the delay in establishing his industry over the plot in question. The UPSIDC has provided the entire necessary infrastructure and this petition lacks merits and is liable to be dismissed.
After having heard the learned counsel for the parties and perusing the averments made in the writ petition and the documents appended thereto as annexures, we are of the view that the questions raised in this writ petition involve adjudication upon the disputed questions of fact, which cannot be decided by this Court in exercise of its writ jurisdiction. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion, we dispose of this writ petition with liberty to the petitioner to file representation along with certified copy of this order before respondent no. 3 raising all the grounds, which has been taken by him in the present writ petition.
In case any such representation is filed by the petitioner before the respondent no. 3 within a period of four weeks from today along with a certified copy of this order, the same shall be considered and decided by respondent no. 3 in accordance with law by a speaking and reasoned order within a further period of four weeks after affording opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.
Order Date :- 30.4.2018 KU