I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner, State, respondent nos.5 to 8, respondent no.10 and 11 to 15 and respondent no.16 and have perused the records of this case.

2. Through this writ application, the petitioner seeks quashing of the letter/memo nos.1539/D, 1540/D, 1541/D, 1542/D and 1543/D all dated 24.9.2004, as contained in Annexure 26 series, issued by the Executive Director, Bihar Industrial Area Development Authority, Patna and further for quashing of the order dated 28.2.2006, as contained in Annexure 40, of the Appellate Authority (Industrial Development Commissioner) whereby the appeals filed against the aforesaid order of cancellation of plots and forceful vacation of the petitioner therefrom, have been dismissed. The present application was originally filed by one Ajay Kumar, Assistant Zonal Manager, M/s Sterlite Foundation Trust. On objection having been raised on behalf of the respondents, one Interlocutory Application No. 3570 of 2009 was filed for allowing M/s Sterlite Foundation Trust to be represented through its Managing Trustee Dwarika Prasad Agrawal, son of late Laxmi Narain Agrawal as the aforesaid Ajay Kumar has already left the Trust. The prayer was allowed. Another I.A. No.7748 of 2009 came to be filed on behalf of the petitioner informing that the name of the petitioner’s firm, namely, M/s Sterlite Foundation has been changed to M/s Vedanta Foundation with the same address. The aforesaid interlocutory application was also allowed directing the petitioner to modify the writ petition. Some interlocutory applications filed on behalf of the interveners, in whose favour the plots concerned were subsequently transferred by the Bihar Industrial Area Development Authority (hereinafter referred to be as ‘BIADA’), were also allowed and they were impleaded as party respondents in the writ petition. I.A. No.4954 of 2011 filed on behalf of the M/s. Bank of India through its Regional Manager was also allowed vide order dated 20.07.2012 and Bank of India was directed to be impleaded as respondent no.16.

3. Short facts that would be necessary for consideration of this writ application are summarized as under:

The plot nos.C-23, C-24, D-5, D-5/A and D-6 were allotted to M/s Aryan Engg. & Allied Industries, Ms. Pravin Trading Corporation, M/s. Eastern Galvenizing Pvt. Ltd., M/s. Union Industrial and Engg. Company and M/s. Universal Polyethylene Industries (hereinafter to be referred to as ‘Five Companies’). Subsequently, the names of the said companies were changed as stated in paragraph no.7 of the writ petition. However, as claimed by the petitioner, due to certain reasons, industries stopped working and eventually vide letter dated 22.12.2000, a proposal was sent to the BIADA for transferring the plots in question in the name of M/s Sterlite Foundation i.e., the petitioner which was the sister concern of the said five companies, for the purpose of establishing a software industry. The petitioner case is that the dues of the financial institutions were also liquidated and after several communication between the parties, it is claimed that the then Area In-Charge of PIADA/BIADA vide letter no.102 dated 6.8.2001 requested the Development Officer to transfer the plots in the name of the petitioner. However, certain objections were raised and, vide letter no.62/D dated 28.1.2002 (Annexure 14), the Development Officer of PIADA informed the petitioner regarding the acceptance of proposal of transfer after fulfillment of certain terms and conditions. Required steps were taken by the petitioner claiming to have fulfilled all the conditions. However, the petitioner requested the Secretary, Industries Department, Government of Bihar, Patna and the Managing Director PIADA/BIADA not to charge any transfer fee as the plot was being transferred to self, i.e., the petitioner being sister concern of the five companies. Again, vide Annexure 21 dated 26.4.03, it is claimed that the Development Officer, BIADA/PIADA ha