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

2021 Supreme(Mad) 1750

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
J. Nisha Banu, J.
S. Bhagyalakshmi & Others – Petitioners
Versus
State of Tamilnadu, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Department of Micro, Small & Medium Enterprises, Chennai & Others – Respondents
W.P.(MD) Nos. 6906, 6907, 6909, 9607, 9609, 9611, 9612, 9614 of 2021 & W.M.P.(MD) Nos. 5297, 5301, 5304, 7359, 7360, 7361, 7362 & 7363, 7487 to 7489 of 2021
Decided On : 01-09-2021

Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner:T. Lajapathi Roy, Advocate.
For the Respondent:Veera Kathiravan, Issac Mohanlal, Senior Counsels, P. Thilak Kumar, Government Advocate, T. Sakthi Kumaran, S. Vijayashanthi, M. Satheesh Kumar, Advocates.

Headnote:

Constitution of India, 1950 - Article 226 - Allotment of plots - Procedure - Official website - Pleased to issue a Writ of Declaration to declare action of respondent No.2 in allotting plots to applications at Industrial Estate on outright sale basis dehors procedure of allotment of plots issued by 2nd respondent in official website 'tansidco.tn.gov.in as illegal and consequentially direct respondent No. 2 to Reallot plots as per Terms of procedure contemplated in allotments of Plots/Sheds/modules as per official website 'tansidco.tn.gov.in' - Whether interview process has been conducted in a hurried manner and whether Lot method adopted by 2nd respondent needs to be interfered with on ground of lack of transparency - Held, When allotment orders are approved, allotment process came to an end and therefore, time of despatch of allotment orders need not be taken serious note of and this Court under Article 226 of Constitution cannot conduct a roving inquiry into time in which allotment orders were issued - Respondents have followed procedure adopted by them in selection of allotees and if this Court interferes with allotment process of lot system before authorities, on ground of lack of transparency, there will be a number of writ petitions before this Court - Even in earlier process, SIDCO has followed same manner of allotment - Court view that process of allotment of 42 plots made by TANSIDCO in respect of Kappalur Industrial Estate need not be interfered with - In future allotments, TANSIDCO will follow proposal approved and shall avoid any room for complaints about sufficient opportunity in future - Writ petitions dismissed.

ORDER :

(Common Prayer in WP(MD) Nos.6906, 6907, 6909, 9607, 9609, 9611, 9612 and 9614 of 2021: Writ Petitions filed praying that in the circumstances stated therein and in the affidavits filed therewith the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ of Declaration to declare the action of the respondent No.2 in allotting plots to the applications on 26.02.2021 at Industrial Estate Kappalur, Madurai district on outright sale basis dehors the procedure of allotment of plots issued by the 2nd respondent in the official website 'tansidco.tn.gov.in as illegal and consequentially direct the respondent No. 2 herein to Reallot the plots as per the Terms of the procedure contemplated in allotments of Plots/Sheds/modules as per the official website 'tansidco.tn.gov.in'.)

1. These writ petitions have been filed by the petitioners seeking to declare the action of the 2nd respondent in allotting plots to the applications on 26.02.2021 at Industrial Estate Kappalur, Madurai District on outright sale basis dehors the procedure of allotment of plots issued by the 2nd respondent in the official website “transidco.tn.gov.in as illegal and consequentially direct the 2nd respondent herein to reallot the plots as per the terms of the procedure contemplated in allotments of plots/sheds/modules as per the official website 'transidco.tn.gov.in'.

2. Since the issue involved in all the writ petitions are one and the same, they were heard together and are disposed of by way of this common order.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that for the development of Micro and Small Establishments, the 2nd respondent herein issued a notification in the official website of SIDCO i.e., in 'www.tansidco.in' inviting applications for allotment of 42 plots in an extent of 9 to 13 cents each and 65 cents for commercial purpose of Industrial Establishments at Kappalur Industrial Estate, Madurai. As per the circular of the SIDCO, dated 29.05.2019, the following procedure must be adopted by officials of SIDCO for allotment of plots/sheds:

    “(a) The details on the plots developed are advertised through leading daily Newspapers and uploaded in the SIDCO website www.sidco.tn.nic.in

(b) Applications are received upto 30 days from the date of release of Advertisement for submission of applications via. https://www.tansidco.in.

(c) The applications received are screened by the Screening Committee consist of Officials of SIDCO, IC & DIC, TIIC, Banks & representatives of TANSTIA.

(d) The selection of plot is being done by LOT if more applications are received than the vacant plots.

(e) The allotment order will be issued to the applicants selected by the Screening Committee.”

But, the SIDCO officials did not conduct the above procedure in letter and spirit. The entire process of selection of allottees are liable to be vitiated for the following irregularities:

(a) No advertisement was published in the newspapers with regard to development of plots at Kappalur Industrial Estate, Madurai.

(b) Without providing 30 days time for submission of application, the applications were invited only from 11.02.2021 to 15.02.2021.

(c) Though the interview was stated to be conducted on 19.02.2021, 22.02.2021 and 26.02.2021, it has been continued even after announcement of Model Election Code of Conduct at 4.30 p.m. on 26.02.2021.

(d) The lot process could not have been concluded and allotment order could not have been issued within 4.30 p.m. on 26.02.2021 as stated by the 2nd respondent, as the interview itself has not been completed within 4.00 p.m. on 26.02.2021.

(e) The allotments had been made by the respondents herein by showing a preference to the persons who has interest over the ruling political parties.

(f) The allotment process has been conducted in undue speed. The allotment of six plots to a single Family Firm show that all the manner of allotment is proceeded with favours and strong influence.

4.0. On the contrary, the learned Senior Counsel Mr.Veera Kathiravan representing

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