State Industrial Development Authority Of Uttarakhand @Hash Union Of India And Others

Ramesh Ranganathan, CJ

Heard Mr. U.K. Uniyal, learned Senior Counsel with Mr. Vipul Sharma, learned counsel for the appellant, Mr. D.C.S. Rawat, learned counsel for respondent no.1, Mr. C.S. Rawat, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State of Uttarakhand/respondent no.2, and Mr. M.S. Tyagi, learned counsel assisted by Mr. H.M. Bhatia, learned for respondent no.3.

The delay of 37 days in filing the appeal is not opposed and is, therefore, condoned.

This appeal is preferred, by the State Industrial Development Authority of Uttarakhand, against the order passed by the learned Single Judge in WPMS No.3811 of 2018 dated 19.12.2018. In the order under appeal the learned Single Judge noted that, by means of the present writ petition, the petitioner had sought to have the impugned order dated 4.12.2018 quashed, whereby the State of Uttarakhand had imposed a penalty of Rs.3,94,80,000/-on the petitioner to compound the layout plan, of the Mega Food Park, situated at Kashipur, Udham Singh Nagar; and the petitioner had also sought to have the order dated 14.12.2018, passed by appellant, quashed whereby the petitioner was directed to deposit upfront 50% of total penalty, and the remaining 50% in four equal installments within one year. The learned Single Judge, after considering the submission of learned counsel for the parties, directed the petitioner to deposit Rs.50,00,000/- with the appellant; and, on deposit of the aforesaid amount, the appellant was directed to release the sanctioned map in favour of the petitioner, and the remaining amount was made subject to the final outcome of the writ petition.

After elaborate submissions were put forth both by Mr. U.K. Uniyal, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. Vipul Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant, and Mr. M.S. Tyagi, learned counsel assisted by Mr. H.M. Bhatia, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent no.3, learned Senior Counsel and learned counsel on either side are in agreement that the order of the learned Single Judge be modified in terms of what they have mutually agreed upon. As such, we see no reason to examine the appeal on its merits.

In terms of what the learned Senior Counsel and the learned counsel on either side have agreed upon, the order of the learned Single Judge is modified and, instead, the following order is passed:-

(1) The appellant acknowledges receipt of Rs.50 lakhs from the respondent-writ petitioner in terms of the order passed by the learned Single Judge.

(2) The respondent-writ petitioner undertakes to furnish an unconditional bank guarantee, from a nationalized bank, for a sum of Rs.1.5 crores to the appellant. The respondent-writ petition shall ensure that the said bank guarantee continues to remain valid during the pendency of the writ petition.

(3) The respondent-writ petitioner undertakes to pay the balance sum of Rs.1,94,80,000/- in four quarterly installments to the appellant. The first quarterly payment shall be made within three months from the date of sanction/release of the map, and the subsequent quarterly installment shall be paid at regular intervals of three months thereafter.

(4) The appellant shall consider the respondent-writ petitioner's application, for grant of sanction of lay out and for release of the map, on or before 15th March, 2019 in accordance with law.

(5) In case the appellant accords sanction, the map shall only be released on the respondent-writ petitioner furnishing an unconditional bank guarantee of Rs.1.5 crores as indicated hereinabove.

Needless to state that the order now passed by us shall be the interlocutory order in the writ petition, and shall be subject to the result of the writ petition.

Let a certified copy of this order be supplied to the learned counsel for the parties by tomorrow i.e.28.02.2019 on payment of the prescribed charges.