The court upheld the cancellation of land allotment due to the petitioner's non-utilization for over twenty years, reinforcing authority's jurisdiction under the BIADA Act, 1974 and its amendments.

ORAL JUDGMENT

Date : 16-05-2025

Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

The present writ petition has been filed for the following relief(s):-

“A. For issuing a writ in the nature of certiorari or any other appropriate writ quashing the Appellate Order dated 21.11.2022 (Annexure-P/1) by the Respondent No.2 whereby and whereunder the appeal preferred by the petitioner bearing Appeal No. 101/2022 against the Office Order bearing Memo по 1088 dated 29.06.2022 passed by the Respondent No. 4 has been dismissed.

B. For issuing a writ in the nature of certiorari or any other appropriate writ quashing the office order bearing Memo no 1088 dated 29.06.2022 (Annexure P/2) passed by the Respondent No. 4, whereby and whereunder allotment made to the Petitioner, of land admeasuring 1.57 Acres of land in Industrial Area, Muzaffarpur which was allotted to the Petitioner has been cancelled.

C. For issuing a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to produce the letter whereby and whereunder the request of the petitioner for "change in project" was rejected but the copy of the same was never served to the petitioner the petitioner also prays for quashing of the said letter once the same is produced.

D. For issuing a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ directing the Respondents to allow the Petitioner to continue to work and run the Food Procession unit on the allotted land.

E. For issuing appropriate order (s) staying all further proceedings and consequential actions pursuant to the Appeal Order dated 21.11.2022 (Annexure-P/1).

F. For passing such further or other order(s) as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.”

3. It is the case of the petitioner that initially he was allotted an area of 43560 sq. ft. Plot No. A-3 in the year 1986 for the purpose of establishing an iron industry and, thereafter, another area of 0.5 acre was allotted in the year 1995 and further area of 0.07 acres in Plot No. A-3 was allotted subsequently, the total area which was allotted to the petitioner is 1.57 acres. That the petitioner after the allotment of the above lands had established the unit and was doing commercial production from the year 1988 till 2000. That in order to run the unit, the petitioner had taken loans from various Banks and financial institutions and due to the adverse market conditions, the petitioner had to face financial crunch and the loan accounts of the petitioner was declared as Non-Performing Assets (NPA) and the petitioner had to shut down the unit. That the respondent-BIADA on 30.08.2007 cancelled the allotment made to the petitioner and, thereafter, the same was restored on 30.07.2008.

4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has stated that the petitioner has from his personal money cleared all the loans and tried to revive the unit but was unsuccessful. Thereafter, the petitioner has made various applications to the respondent authority for change of the product. Learned counsel has stated that the authority without passing any orders on the application made by the petitioner for change of product had inspected the premises on 22.01.2021. Based on the inspection report, a show cause notice was issued on 19.02.2021 and the petitioner in his reply to the authorities had sought permission for change of the product and also gave an undertaking that he is willing to revive the unit and start the commercial production within one and half years. However, the authority without considering the same has cancelled the allotment made to the petitioner vide order dated 29.06.2022 (Anne