1. - Brief facts of the case are that auction of the industrial plot No. E-522 measuring 49.7x62 mtrs. situated at Sitapura Industrial Area, Jaipur took place on 20.03.1997. The petitioner also participated in the auction proceedings and his bid was accepted being highest on 29.03.97 and the petitioner deposited 25% of the cost of the plot on 10.04.97.

2. On 30.05.97, on the ground of delay on the part of the RIICO in handing over the possession to the petitioner company, the petitioner informed the RIICO that the company is no more interested in purchasing the plot, but the respondents have not accepted the surrender of the plot and have forfeited 25% of the cost which has been deposited by the petitioner and cancelled the allotment vide order dated 14.08.97.

3. The main contention of the petitioner is that instead of cancelling the said allotment of plot, it should be considered as surrender by the petitioner, as informed vide Annexure-7 dated 30.05.97. As the petitioner company was not at all interested to purchase the plot and surrender the same, the respondents could only forfeit the amount as per Rule 18(6) (Surrender/Cancellation of Plots) of the RIICO Disposal of Land Rules, 1979 (for short 'the Rules of 1979'), according to which, if any allottee or a lessee intends to surrender a plot or part thereof for any reason, the Corporation may accept it on the condition as it may deem fit. In such cases of surrender of plots or on cancellation of plot the amount of development charges recovered from the party will be refunded. However, the amount of security money, economic rent, service charges and interest on unpaid economic rent and service charges shall be deducted while refunding the amount.

4. Here in the instant case, RIICO has cancelled the plot allotted in favour of the petitioner company as the petitioner failed to execute lease.Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that for cancellation, the respondents ought to have followed the procedure as laid down in Rule 24 of the Rules of 1979. As per Rule 24, the Corporation shall have the right to cancel the allotment after issuing a 30 days show cause notice to the allottee by the concerned Senior Regional Manager/Regional Manager for any breach of any of these rules, condition of allotment letter and terms of lease agreement.

5. Thus, the respondents ought to have issued 30 days show cause notice which has not been issued, therefore, the order of cancellation of plot is contrary to the provisions of Rule 24 of the Rules of 1979.

6. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the respondent RIICO submits that the present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner company after an inordinate delay as the allotment of plot in question has already been cancelled in the year 1997 whereas this writ petition is filed in the year 2004. He further submits that vide Annexure-7, the petitioner company has sated that "Because of failure on the part of RIICO give possession of the land, we are no more interested in the above plot which please note." which is contrary to the fact. The RIICO repeatedly requested the petitioner company to complete the formalities and execute lease and also issued several letters to the petitioner company in this regard, but the petitioner failed to deposit the remaining 75% of the amount. It is also contended that the petitioner has breached the terms and conditions of the auction of industrial plot situated in Sitapura Industrial Area, Jaipur, more particularly clause-7 of the conditions. As the petitioner failed to deposit 75% of the balance amount, it was made clear that the plot which was auctioned in favour of the petitioner shall be cancelled and amount will be refunded after deduction of 25% amount of bid.

7. Learned counsel for the respondents also referred Annexure-8, the i letter dated 06.06.97 issued to the petitioner, wherein the petitioner was called upon to execute necessary legal documents and called upon to make the payment of