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

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN - JAIPUR BEN
SUNSHINE DRINKS PVT LTD – Appellant
Versus
RAJ STATE INDU DEVELOPMENT – Respondent
CW 2200/2010



S.B. CIVIL WRIT

PETITION NO.2200/2010

1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT

JAIPUR BENCH JAIPUR

ORDER

S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.2200/2010

Sunshine Drinks Pvt. Ltd.

Vs.

Rajasthan State Industrial Development and Investment Corporation Ltd.

(RIICO)

Date of Order :

12.02.2013

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK SHARMA

Mr. Suresh Kumar Pareek, for the petitioner-Company.

Mr. Sameer Jain, for respondent-RIICO.

BY THE COURT

1)

The matter comes up on an application

No.24550/2010 under Article 226(3) of the Constitution of

India for vacation of the ex-parte interim order dated

17.02.2010, passed by this Court.

2)

Counsels, for the petitioner and the respondent-

RIICO, have submitted that the disposal of the aforesaid

application under Article 226(3) of the Constitution of India

would entail the same arguments as to the disposal of the

petition as the whole. It is therefore prayed that the writ

petition be disposed of finally.

3)

With the consent of the parties, the writ petition

is being decided finally at this stage.

4)

The facts of the case are that an industrial plot

bearing No.C-26-C situate at Malviya Industrial Area,

S.B. CIVIL WRIT

PETITION NO.2200/2010

2

Jaipur was allotted to the petitioner-Company by the

Rajasthan State Industrial Development and Investment

Corporation Ltd. (hereinafter 'RIICO') on 10.01.1978.

Thereafter, a lease-deed dated 30.08.1978 was executed by

RIICO in favour of the petitioner-Company. A condition of

the lease-deed was that the Lessee shall not carry on or

permit to be carried on the demised premises any activities

for any purpose, other than industrial purposes, without the

previous consent in writing of the Lessor and the Local

Municipal Authority and subject to such terms and

conditions as the Lessor/Local Municipal Authority may

impose for the alternate user.

5)

RIICO received several complaints from Malviya

Industrial Area Labour Union as also Malviya Industries

Association against the petitioner-Company that the

industrial plot allotted to the petitioner-Company was being

misused for commercial purposes without any industrial

activities being carried out thereon. It was stated that in

fact the industrial plot in issue was being run as a marriage

garden. A committee thereupon was constituted on

20.02.2009 by the Managing Director of RIICO to enquire

into and take strict action against the allottees who were

violating the terms and conditions of the lease-deed

executed in their favour in Malviya Industrial Area, Jaipur.

A four members' committee headed by the Regional

S.B. CIVIL WRIT

PETITION NO.2200/2010

3

Manager of RIICO at Jaipur found on an enquiry made that

the industrial plot allotted to the petitioner-Company was

being used for marriage function as well as guest house

and no industrial activity was being carried thereon. The

unit was in fact being run as a 'Hotel King Win'.

6)

A show cause notice was issued to the petitioner-

Company by RIICO under the hand of its Regional

Manager, Jaipur on 24.05.2004 and thereafter on

06.04.2005 and then on 17.06.2005 requiring the

petitioner-Company to show cause as to why the lease-deed

dated 30.08.1978 not be cancelled for breach of the

specific conditions thereof with regard to the user being

confined to industrial purpose and not being altered

without permission of RIICO. Reply filed by the petitioner-

Company to the show cause notices was not found

satisfactorily by RIICO. Consequently, vide order dated

08.02.2006, the lease-deed dated 30.08.1978 executed in

favour of the petitioner-Company in respect of industrial

plot No.C-26-C situated at Malviya Industrial Area, Jaipur

was cancelled by the Regional Manager of RIICO.

Simultaneous to the cancellation aforesaid, the petitioner-

Company was asked to hand over the possession of the plot

in issue within seven days and take the refundable amou

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
whatsapp-icon Back to top