The court ruled that resumption of industrial land must consider actual utilization for intended purposes, rejecting technical approaches that undermine industrial growth.

JUDGMENT

Nitin Jamdar, C.J.

The Appellant is the Original Petitioner, who had filed the writ petition challenging the order passed by Respondent No. 1 – the General Manager, District Industries Centre, Ernakulam, to resume the land allotted to the Petitioner in the Industrial Development Area of Angamaly. The writ petition having been dismissed, the Appellant is before us with this Appeal under Section 5 of the Kerala High Court Act, 1958.

2. The Appellant was allotted land, which had an extent of 1.46 acres, in Survey Nos. 448/1 and 448/2 of Nedumbassery Village, in the Industrial Development Area at Angamaly, Ernakulam district, by Respondent No.1 – General Manager of District Industries Centre (Referred as Department), on 23 July 2003, for establishing a unit for the manufacture of rice and rice bran. According to the Appellant, when the Appellant sought consent from the State Pollution Control Board, the Pollution Control Board, by communication dated 19 October 2006, informed the Appellant that the unit could not be allowed to be established in the absence of an effluent treatment plant. The Appellant needed two more acres of land for the effluent treatment plant and applied for additional land to erect the plant. At that time, another unit – M/s. Kancor Ingredients Ltd., from the industrial area, became defunct, and an extent of 6 Ares, which was lying unutilised by it, was resumed by the Department and out of the 6 acres, 2.5 acres were allotted to the Petitioner.

3. The Appellant received the required additional land by order dated 7 November 2007. When the Appellant started construction of the unit, Respondent No. 4, another entrepreneur, made complaints to various authorities such as the Forest Department, Industries Department, etc. The Appellant received clearance from the Forest Department by Exhibit-P18 letter dated 17 June 2010. Thereafter, Respondent No.4 made a complaint to the Industries Department and sought a prohibitory order against the Appellant. There were enquiries pursuant to the complaint. The Appellant submitted a revised plan, which was approved on 14 January 2011, with a condition to complete the construction within 26 months.

4. Respondent No. 4 filed W.P.(C) No. 33457 of 2009 stating that there are vacant unutilised lands and his priority claim for allotment has been bypassed. The learned Single Judge disposed of the writ petition directing that if there is any vacant land available, it should be allotted to Respondent No. 4, and if no such land is available for allotment, the Department will consider whether any land in the industrial area remains unutilised, then the same be allotted after the resumption. The learned Single Judge, while disposing of the writ petition by judgment dated 4 July 2012, made an observation that the Petitioner's original request was only for 3 acres and, therefore, it could not have been allotted more lands than 3 acres, which is liable to be resumed. Being aggrieved by this observation, the Appellant filed W.A. No. 1790 of 2012, which was disposed of by the Division Bench by judgment dated 30 May 2013 (Exhibit-P31) clarifying that there is no specific finding regarding the existence of unutilised land qua the Appellant and it was only a passing remark in the judgment.

5. Meanwhile, on 28 July 2012, the Department issued Exhibit-P4 notice to the Appellant referring to the order passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.(C) No. 33457 of 2009 dated 4 July 2012 stating that the High Court has directed the Department to resume the unutilised land in the industrial area and it is mentioned in the judgment that 3 acres of land allotted to the Appellant is liable to be cancelled and resumed, and since 1 acre of land is unutilised by the Appellant, the same has been sought to be resumed. The Appellant submitted Exhibit-P5 reply to the show cause notice on 6 August 2012. The Department passed an order on 23 August 2012 (Exhibit- P6) direc