A petitioner cannot challenge land allotment modifications or cancellations after years of inaction, as such conduct constitutes waiver and acquiescence under the doctrine of equitable relief, bars subsequent claims, and justifies the dismissal of the petition on grounds of laches.

Present writ petition is filed with following prayers:

“(i) The order dated 03.09.2025 (Annex-49) may kindly be quashed and set aside.

(ii) The demand note dated 26.09.2025 (Annex-50) raised in pursuance of the order dated 03.09.2025 may kindly be quashed and set aside.

(iii) That the order dated 15.01.2025 (Annex-42), cancelling the plot allotted to the petitioner may kindly be quashed and set aside.

(iv) That the appeal filed by the petitioner may kindly be allowed in toto, thereby restoring the original allotment of Plot No. E-134 admeasuring 3000 sq.m. and the respondent authorities may be directed to allot/restore the remaining 1480 sq.m. forming part of the said plot to the petitioner at the same rate as the original allotment made in they ear 2000, and to hand over its peaceful physical possession and execute the lease deed accordingly.

(v) The respondent corporation may further by directed to allot the strip of land admeasuring 147 sqmt attached to the petitioner’s original allotted 3000 sq.mt. Land, as per rules.

(vi) Direct the respondent authorities to pay just and reasonable compensation to the petitioner towards the loss, mental agony, harassment, and financial injury suffered due to the prolonged inaction, arbitrary cancellation, and discriminatory treatment extending over more than two decades.

(vv) Declare the demand of Rs. 14,90,501/- as illegal, and further direct the respondent authorities not to recover the said amount from the petitioner in any manner whatsover; and if any part of the said amount is, at any stage, realized or recovered, the same may kindly be refunded to the petitioner forthwith along with interest as this Hon’ble Court may deem just and proper;

(viii) Any other relief which this Hon’ble Court deems just and proper in favour of the petitioner, may kindly be granted and

(ix) The cost of the writ petition be allowed in favour of the petitioner.”

Chequered history of the case, germane to present writ petition, as stated by learned counsel for petitioner, is as under :-

Rajasthan State Industrial Development and Investment Corporation Ltd. (for short, “RIICO”) has initially allotted Plot No. E-134 admeasuring 3,000 sq.mt., situated at Industrial Area, Ajolia Ka Khera, Chittorgarh, under RIICO Land Disposal Rules, 1979 (hereinafter referred to as the “Rules of 1979”), vide allotment letter dated 24.03.2000 (Annexure-1) to the petitioner. Pursuant thereto, initially petitioner deposited 25% of allotment charges and remaining 75% amount was deposited / offered in three installments. It is stated that despite deposit of installment amounts, possession of plot measuring 3,000 sq.mt. was not given to petitioner. Consequently, petitioner submitted representations requesting for demarcation of plot and handing over of possession of plot.

It is stated that respondent–RIICO, vide letter dated 21.06.2001 (Annexure-6), intimated petitioner that upon demarcation, only land measuring 1520 sq.mt. was found available at the site and remaining area of allotted plot was found to be under encroachment, which could not be removed inspite best efforts. By said communication, excess amounts deposited by petitioner was returned by respondent–RIICO.

Although, initially petitioner objected to accept the refund of amount, however, later on, cheque of excess amount as sent by respondent - RIICO vide communication dated 20.02.2007 was accepted by petitioner.

It is contended that said plot measuring 1520 sq.mt., was not suitable for carrying out industrial activity, as a water channel was running through the same and petitioner continued to request for allotment of entire land measuring 3,000 sq.mt. However, said issue remained unresolved at the end of respondents.

Relying upon official no