O R D E R

1. This is the fourth round of litigation at the instance of the petitioner before this Court. The petitioner had initially approached this Court by way of W.P.(C) No. 7604/2007, seeking quashing of the order dated 15.07.2004, whereby its claim for allotment of an alternative industrial plot under the Relocation Scheme, 1996, had been rejected on the ground that its industrial unit was situated in a conforming area, namely, Udyog Nagar.

2. Vide order dated 05.03.2009, this Court disposed of the petition after recording the submission made by the learned counsel on behalf of the Commissioner of Industries that, upon re-examination of the matter, the respondents had concluded that the petitioner's industrial unit situated at Plot No. 19, Swarn Park, Mundka, fell in a non- conforming area and that the petitioner was, therefore, entitled to an alternative industrial plot. In view of the aforesaid submission, this Court quashed the impugned order dated 15.07.2004 and directed the respondents to process the petitioner's application expeditiously and communicate their decision, in any event, within two months. The aforesaid order is reproduced hereinbelow:

“The petitioner seeks quashing of an order dated 15.7.2004 issued by the second respondent. The petitioner had applied for allotment of an alternative plot on the ground that he was entitled to reallocation since the factory fell in a non-conforming area. In the Impugned letter, authority i.e., Commissioner of Industry stated that factory fell in a conforming area i.e. Udyog Nagar.

Mr. Sabharwal, learned counsel for the respondent Commissioner of Industries submitted that he has instructions to state that after re-examination of the matter, the Commissioner is now of the opinion that the petitioner concern i.e. Central Footwear Company, Plot No. 19, Swarn Park, Mundka false in a non-conforming area and would be entitled to an alternative plot. A copy of the communication addressed in that regard has been produced. The same is hereby taken on record.

In the light of the above submission, the petition has to succeed;

Impugned order dated 15.7.2004 is hereby quashed.

respondents are hereby directed to process the petitioner\s application expeditiously and communicate its decision to the petitioner as expeditiously as possible and in any case within two months from today.”

3. Thereafter, the petitioner again approached this Court by way of W.P.(C) No. 3889/2015, seeking a direction to the respondents to allot an industrial plot against its application dated 26.12.1996 bearing No. 4875, in view of the earlier order dated 05.03.2009. Vide order dated 13.07.2017, this Court noted that the earlier order had attained finality and that, despite the same, the petitioner's application had not been processed. Since the original records pertaining to the petitioner's application were stated to be unavailable with the respondents, this Court held that the respondents were nevertheless bound to comply with the earlier order and process the petitioner's application. This Court further recorded the statement made on behalf of the respondents that upon production of even one such document, the petitioner's application would be processed forthwith without any further objections. Taking note of the petitioner's Sales Tax Registration Certificate indicating the existence of its factory at the aforesaid premises with effect from 01.01.1994, the Court directed the respondents to verify its authenticity and, upon such verification, process the petitioner's application for allotment of an alternative industrial plot. The relevant extract of the aforesaid order is reproduced hereinbelow:

“3. The said order has become final as neither any review nor an appeal was filed against the said order. Despite the aforesaid order, the petitioner's application has not been processed. This has led the petitioner to file the present petition.

4. Mr Satyakam, the learned counsel appearing for the respond