Back
2019 Supreme(Raj) 139
IN THE HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
Sandeep Mehta, J.
Kamal Prints and Ors. – Appellants
Vs.
RIICO Ltd. and Ors. – Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Nos. 1193 and 1195 of 2010
Decided On : 25-03-2019
For the Appellant : Rakesh Arora
For the Respondent: Sanjeet Purohit and C.S. Bareth
A change in the constitution of a firm prior to the passing of a judgment directing the shifting of industries to a new industrial area does not justify the rejection of an application for allotment of an industrial plot, especially when the firm with the newly added partners was functioning well before the judgment.
Headnote:
INDUSTRIAL PLOT ALLOTMENT - REJECTION OF APPLICATION - CHANGE IN FIRM'S CONSTITUTION - VALIDITY - ARTICLE 14 - ARTICLE 19 - ARTICLE 21 - RAJASTHAN INDUSTRIAL AREAS DEVELOPMENT ACT, 1963 - RAJASTHAN INDUSTRIAL AREAS DEVELOPMENT RULES, 1964 - RAJASTHAN INDUSTRIAL AREAS DEVELOPMENT (ALLOTMENT OF PLOTS) RULES, 1975 - RAJASTHAN INDUSTRIAL AREAS DEVELOPMENT (ALLOTMENT OF PLOTS) RULES, 2005 - RAJASTHAN INDUSTRIAL AREAS DEVELOPMENT (ALLOTMENT OF PLOTS) RULES, 2010 - RAJASTHAN INDUSTRIAL AREAS DEVELOPMENT (ALLOTMENT OF PLOTS) RULES, 2015 - RAJASTHAN INDUSTRIAL AREAS DEVELOPMENT (ALLOTMENT OF PLOTS) RULES, 2020 - RAJASTHAN INDUSTRIAL AREAS DEVELOPMENT (ALLOTMENT OF PLOTS) RULES, 2022 - SUMMARY
Fact of the Case:
Petitioners challenged the decision of the Allotment Committee rejecting their applications for allotment of industrial plots in the Punayata Industrial Scheme, Pali, on the ground that there had been a change in the constitution of the firm applying for the plot. The change in constitution occurred prior to the passing of the judgment by the Division Bench of the Court in 2004, which directed the shifting of industries to a new industrial area to address environmental concerns.
Finding of the Court:
The Court held that the reason for rejecting the petitioners' applications, namely, the change in the constitution of the firm, was not justified and misconceived. The change in constitution occurred prior to the passing of the judgment directing the shifting of industries, and the firms with the newly added partners were functioning well before the judgment. The Court found that the Allotment Committee had exceeded its jurisdiction by embarking on an enquiry about the change of constitution without examining the requirements of the advertisement, which were otherwise satisfied by the petitioner firms.
Issues: 1. Whether the Allotment Committee's rejection of the petitioners' applications on the ground of change in firm's constitution was valid. 2. Whether the Allotment Committee exceeded its jurisdiction by embarking on an enquiry about the change of constitution without examining the requirements of the advertisement.
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The Court held that the Allotment Committee's rejection of the petitioners' applications on the ground of change in firm's constitution was not justified and misconceived. The change in constitution occurred prior to the passing of the judgment directing the shifting of industries, and the firms with the newly added partners were functioning well before the judgment. 2. The Court found that the Allotment Committee had exceeded its jurisdiction by embarking on an enquiry about the change of constitution without examining the requirements of the advertisement, which were otherwise satisfied by the petitioner firms.
Final Decision: The Court quashed and set aside the communications issued by the Allotment Committee rejecting the petitioners' applications. The Court directed the Allotment Committee to reconsider the applications of the petitioners afresh in an objective manner, taking into consideration the documentary proof submitted by the petitioners and pass a reasoned order in this regard. The Court also directed the Allotment Committee to complete the entire process for scrutiny of claims of the respective applicants for the purpose of shifting of industries strictly in accordance with law and while avoiding unnecessary technicalities.
Sandeep Mehta, J.
1. The present set of writ petitions were filed challenging the decision taken by the Allotment Committee headed by District Collector, Pali in its meeting dated 29.09.2009 and 05.11.2009 whereby the applications submitted by the petitioner for allotment of industrial plot in Industrial Area Punayata, Pali was rejected.
2. The facts relevant and necessary for disposal of the instant writ petition are noted here-in-below for the sake of reference.
3. A large number of textile industries were established within the municipal areas of Pali which were operating in an indiscriminate and haphazard manner which resulted into mass scale pollution to the land as well as water bodies of town and its surrounding areas. A public interest litigation being D.B. Civil Writ Petition (PIL) No. 759/2002 : Mahaveer Nagar Vikas Samiti vs State of Rajasthan & Ors. came to be filed by one Mahaveer Nagar Vikas Samiti raising issues regarding environmental hazards and industrial malactivities being caused by the unauthorized industries many of which were in operation even in the residential areas of Pali.
4. The Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court issued detailed directions thereby mandating the establishment of a new industrial area and for shifting of the existing industries to such an area which would mandatorily be equipped with all necessary measures so as to prevent further damage to the environment. The substratum of directions given by Division Bench of this Court in the said PIL vide order dated 09.03.2004 is reproduced hereinbelow for sake of ready reference:-
"I. The Pollution Control Board shall immediately make fresh inspection of the Textile Processing Units at Pali and surrounding areas and in case any of the units are found to be creating pollution and not connected to the CETPs shall be closed.
II. The units which are creating pollution shall adopt measures to eliminate pollution.
III. RIICO shall set up industrial area at a suitable place exclusively for textile processing units. The industrial area must be located at an appropriate distance from residential areas. RIICO shall set up the industrial area within a period of six months and the industry shall be shifted to the industrial area from residential areas immediately thereafter.
IV. The trust shall make modification in the CETP so that the emissions therefrom are compatible with the norms prescribed by the Pollution Control Board.
V. The industrial units which are discharging the industrial pollutant on the land or/and river shall be closed forthwith.
VI. The State shall employee experts to assess the damage caused to the environment and health of the public by the pollution created by the Units. On assessment of the damage, the concerned authority shall file a report in this court within a period of eight weeks, whereupon the question of payment of compensation by the units on the principles of polluter pays shall be determined."
5. Accordingly, a new industrial area was carved out in Village Punayata, District Pali; requisite surveys were conducted and a list was prepared by the District Industrial Centre, Pali for allotment of fresh industrial plots. The industrial area, thus, created comprised of 333 plots. The process of allotment was initiated in the year 2005. The first survey list dated 11.07.2005 prepared by the DIC included names of as many as 255 incumbents. The second survey list dated 02.09.2008 contained names of 32 industries whereas the third survey list contained names of 61 industries of which 37 were common to the earlier list/s. Applications for allotment were invited from the incumbents whose names were included in these survey lists which were also approved by the Collector. The aspirants were required to submit title proof viz. (1) allotment letter/patta if the land was within municipal area or the Jamabandi in case if the industry was established on agricultural land; (2) electricity bill; & (3) affidavit to the effect that the existin
