SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2022 Supreme(Cal) 256

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT CALCUTTA
Aniruddha Roy, J.
Rupali Chattopadhyay (Prt. Anutosh Chattopadhyay since deceased) & Others - Appellant
Versus
The State of West Bengal & Others - Respondent
W.P.A. No. 172 of 2007
Decided On : 13-07-2022

Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :Aniruddha Chatterjee, Debabrata Roy, Advocates, Noelle Banerjee, Barrister at Law.
For the Respondents:Santanu Kumar Mitra, Subhabrata Das, Advocates.

Violation of terms of allotment and intended change of purpose without obtaining prior approval led to the court's decision to affirm the cancellation of the allotment and dismissal of the writ petition.

Headnote:

Allotment of Plot - Small Scale Industrial unit - [Small Scale Industrial unit] - [West Bengal Land Reforms Act, 1955, Section 14] - The court discussed the terms of allotment of the plot, the provisional nature of the allotment, and the requirement for submission of necessary documents including SSI registration certificate and project report. The court highlighted the violation of terms of allotment by the original petitioner, the provisional nature of the SSI certificate submitted, and the lack of approval for change of user of the plot.

Fact of the Case:

The original petitioner applied for a leasehold land to establish a Small Scale Industrial unit. The authority provisionally allotted a plot for manufacturing transformer and electrical equipment, subject to submission of necessary documents. The original petitioner violated the terms of allotment by not submitting the required documents and intended to change the purpose of the plot without approval.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the original petitioner violated the terms of allotment and intended to change the purpose of the plot without obtaining prior approval. The court affirmed the decision for cancellation of the allotment and resumption of the plot, stating that it was a well-reasoned and well-founded decision.

Issues: Violation of terms of allotment, change of purpose of the plot without approval, provisional nature of the SSI certificate, lack of necessary approvals for intended use of the plot.

Ratio Decidendi: The original petitioner's violation of the terms of allotment and intended change of purpose without obtaining prior approval led to the court's decision to affirm the cancellation of the allotment and dismissal of the writ petition.

Final Decision: The writ petition was dismissed, and there was no order as to costs.

JUDGMENT :

Facts:

1. The present writ petitioners are the legal heirs and successors in interest of the original writ petitioner, namely, Anutosh Chattopadhyay, since deceased (for short, the original writ petitioner). Pursuant to an order dated February 17, 2022 the present petitioners were substituted in place and stead of the original writ petitioner.

2. For the purpose of establishing a Small Scale Industrial unit (for short, SSI Unit), the original petitioner in or about 1982 applied before the respondent authority for obtaining a lease hold land. By a letter dated April 05, 1982 the authority concern in receipt of a letter dated March 09, 1982 informed the original petitioner that it had started allotting land for Small Scale Industries measuring about two and half cottahs to about fifteen cottahs and asked the original petitioner to submit the proof and documents of his registration with the SSI Department, his Project Report and Proof of his Financial Capability. He was also informed that upon submissions of all the above documents his application would be considered on the basis of an interview to be held by the authority and in such interview the original petitioner could authorize his representative to appear in such interview.

3. By a communication dated April 12, 1982 the respondent authority informed the petitioner to appear for the interview for obtaining an allotment of industrial plot for setting up SSI Unit at Salt-lake on April 22, 1982 and to produce the documents mentioned in the said communication which, inter alia, included a detailed scheme for which the land was sought for duly approved by the SSI Department.

4. On October 01, 1982, Annexure P-3 to the writ petition, the authority concerned by its written communication offered the original petitioner the lease for a plot of five cottahs in Sector IV/V of Bidhannagar (Salt-Lake Township) for 999 years for the purpose of manufacturing transformer and electrical equipment subject to his submission of the necessary certificates mentioned at paragraph 14 of the said written communication and on the terms and conditions mentioned therein. the allotment of plot was provisional. Paragraph 14 of the written communication is reproduced herein below:

    “i) Provisional Small Scale Industries Registration Certificate issued by the Cottage & Small Scale Industries Directorate, supported by approved scheme/project report.

(ii) Clearance Certificate from Competent Authority for Air and Water Pollution.”

5. On November 12, 1982 on the basis of the said terms and conditions, the Original petitioner in writing submitted his choice of plot for setting up a transformer and electrical manufacturing unit. Necessary money was also paid. The plot concerned was at Block EN, Sector V, Salt-Lake (for short, the plot). The further terms and conditions for payment of consideration was duly intimated to the original petitioner through a written communication dated November 21, 1983. The Certificate from the SSI Department as was submitted by the original petitioner was dated February 03, 1983, Annexure P-5 to the writ petition.

6. By a written communication dated May 04, 2004, Annexure P-7 to the writ petition, the respondent authority informed the original petitioner that though a provisional allotment of the plot was made in his favour for the purpose of manufacturing of transformer and electrical equipment, despite several communications made by the authority the requisite papers and documents were not furnished by the original petitioner. It was found that the original petitioner sought to construct a dwelling house without having any prior approval from the authority on the plot, though it was provisionally allotted for setting up an SSI Unit. He was further informed that one Swapan Kumar Mitra being the constituted attorney of the original petitioner applied for delivery of possession of the plot for setting up a hotel under the name and style of LE Sopan Hotel Industries by changing the

    Click Here to Read the rest of this document
    1
    2
    3
    4
    5
    6
    7
    8
    9
    10
    11
    SupremeToday Portrait Ad
    supreme today icon
    logo-black

    An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

    Please visit our Training & Support
    Center or Contact Us for assistance

    qr

    Scan Me!

    India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

    For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

    whatsapp-icon Back to top