Chief Justice's Court
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 25926 of 2018 Petitioner :- O.P. Batra Respondent :- Managing Director U.P. State Industrial Development Corporation Ltd. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Pankaj Misra Counsel for Respondent :- Anadi Krishna Narayana
Hon'ble Dilip B. Bhosale,Chief Justice Hon'ble Yashwant Varma,J.
Heard Mr. Pankaj Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. S.K. Mishra, learned counsel for respondent nos. 1 to 3 - Corporation.
This petition is directed against the order dated 17.05.2018 issued by the second respondent, by which allotment made in favour of the petitioner of Industrial Plot No. D-68, Industrial Area, Baghpat, has been cancelled. The allotment has been cancelled mainly on the ground that the petitioner did not make the payment within the time stipulated in the allotment letter dated 09.02.2007, and that he did not comply with the formalities/requirements for execution of the lease deed. Counsel appearing for the petitioner, invited our attention to the correspondence made by him to show that the respondent Corporation did not invite him to execute a lease deed as contemplated by the relevant clauses in the allotment letter, nor did they ever inform the petitioner the exact area of the plot that was allotted to him. He also invited our attention to some correspondence to show that the petitioner was always ready and willing to make the payment and also execute the lease deed.
On the other hand, counsel appearing for the respondent Corporation, invited our attention to the terms and conditions mentioned in the allotment letter and in particular paragraphs 12, 13 and 14 thereof, to submit that the petitioner, though was invited, did not come forward to comply with the formalities for execution of the lease deed nor did he make payments within the stipulated time. He submitted that the petitioner was supposed to make the entire payment within five years from the date of the allotment which he admittedly failed to do. He submitted that the correspondence relied upon is all recent i.e. after 2014. Insofar as the area of plot is concerned, it was specifically mentioned in the allotment letter.
Admittedly, the petitioner did not make payment as per the allotment letter within the stipulated time nor did he comply with the formalities for execution of the lease deed. We have perused the letter of allotment dated 09.02.2007. Paragraphs 12 to 14 of the allotment letter, read thus:
"12. Before execution of Lease deed you shall have to:-
(a) Submit S.S.I. registration certificate issued by District Industries Centre or copy of receipt of filing memorandum with SIA or Letter of Intent/Industrial License as the case may be for the item of manufacturing for which this allotment is made.
(b) Clear all dues upto the date of executing lease deed as mentioned in clause 3, 4 and 5 of the letter.
(c) Any other formalities required, if any.
13. You will have to execute the Lease Deed and get the same registered within 60 days from the date of letter from the corporations asking you to do so failing which the allotment is liable be cancelled with the consequences as per Clause-7 above.
14. You will have to take over possession after executing the Lease Deed within 30 days from the date of inviting you to do so failing which the allotment is liable to be cancelled with the same consequences as in Clause-7 above."
Counsel for the petitioner fairly admits that the petitioner has not submitted even SSI registration certificate till today nor has he paid the dues within the time stipulated for execution of the lease deed as mentioned in clauses 3, 4 and 5 of the letter of allotment. His statement that the petitioner was not invited to execute lease deed, as contemplated under paragraph 14 of the letter of allotment, also deserves to be rejected outright, in view of the fact that the petitioner has not placed any material on record in support of this contention nor has he made averments in the writ petition that he was not invited to execute the lease deed within the stipulated time. On the other hand, it is the specific case of the respondent Corporation that though the petitioner was repeatedly told to complete all formalities, he did not.
In the circumstances and in our opinion, the respondent Corporation has rightly cancelled the allotment. The order of cancellation, in our opinion, does not warrant interference by this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
Petition is accordingly dismissed.
Order Date :- 31.7.2018 AHA (Dilip B Bhosale, CJ) (Yashwant Varma, J)