IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VISHAL DHAGAT th ON THE 9 OF MAY, 2023 WRIT PETITION No. 19561 of 2017 BETWEEN:-

RKDF WORKSHOP THR. ITS PRO. SMT. SADHNA KAPOOR W/O SHRI SUNIL KAPOOR A/A 56 AT PLOT NO. 2-C SECTOR A MANDIDEEP DISTT. RAISEN, THR. R/O E-

3-4A AREA COLONY BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)

.....PETITIONER (BY SHRI SUMIT NEMA - SENIOR ADVOCATE WITH SHRI AYUSH GUPTA -

ADVOCATE)

AND

1. MADHYA PRADESH AUDHYOGIK KENDRA VIKASH NIGAM LIMITED THR. CHIEF GENERAL MANAGER TAWA COMPLEX 1ST FLOOR BITTAN MARKET E-5 ARERA COLONY BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH) 462016

2. MANAGING DIRECTOR TRADE AND INVESTMENT FACILITATION CORPORATION LTD. ACTING AS THE APPELLATE AUTHORITY SADMAP BHAWAN 16 A ARERA HILLS (MADHYA PRADESH)

3. PRINCIPAL SECRETARY INDUSTRY DEPTT. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH MANTRALAYA BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)

.....RESPONDENTS (BY SHRI SAHIL SHARMA - ADVOCATE)

This petition coming on for admission this day, the court passed the following:

ORDER

Petitioner has filed this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging order dated 05.08.2017 contained in Annexure-P/1 and order dated 22.09.2017.

2. Brief facts of the case are that unit belonging to petitioner firm was inspected on 21.06.2017 and it was found that on spot in place of fabrication work, repairing and maintenance and job work one Rural Health and Training Center was in operation. There was no industrial activity on spot and, therefore, petitioner's firm has violated Clause-9 of lease deed. Letter was issued to petitioner and he was called in Office for discussion but none appeared, therefore, Managing Director, MP Audyogik Kendra Vikas Nigam Limited, Bhopal (MP) vide its order dated 05.08.2017 cancelled transfer deed dated 29.03.2006, original lease deed dated 15.07.1985 and amended lease deed dated 22.05.2006 and security amount of Rs.10,038/- was confiscated in favour of Nigam. Petitioner was granted 30 days' time to file an appeal. Petitioner preferred an appeal stating therein that plot measuring 18000 square feet was transferred on 29.03.2006 in favour of M/S RKDF workshop.

3. Petitioner firm was doing fabrication work, repairing and maintenance and job work. Petitioner has filed reply to show cause notice and informed Nigam that workshop is in operation on said plot as per lease agreement and lease rent was also paid. Petitioner firm is doing industrial production on said plot. It is also submitted that all arrears and dues regarding revenue fee, service taxes and other taxes have been paid. Petitioner was not having any knowledge in respect of inspection dated 21.06.2017 and no notice was ever given to him nor petitioner received any letter dated 05.07.2017. Action has been taken by respondent without providing proper opportunity of hearing. Appellate Authority dismissed the appeal without considering grounds raised by petitioner. Petitioner has filed this petition that order dated 05.08.2017 is passed without appreciating the evidence and conducting physical verification of lease property. Petitioner did not have any opportunity to rebut the material available against him. In these circumstances, impugned order is bad in law and same may be set aside.

4. Learned counsel appearing for respondents submitted that M/S Shri Satya Sai Pharmaceuticals Company was allotted plot vide lease deed dated 15.07.1985 and permission of transfer was also given on 29.03.2006. However, amended registered lease deed has not been submitted to respondents, therefore, petitioner does not have any locus standi to challenge the impugned order. If erstwhile owner M/S Shri Satya Sai Pharmaceuticals Company is aggrieved then they ought to have come in Court. Petitioner cannot be termed to be aggrieved party and has no locus standi. It is submitted that original copy was handed over to authorized Officer on behalf of RKDF Workshop on 22.05.2006 for purpose of registration but no action has been taken by petitioner. Show cause notice was issued to petit