AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
To begin with, this Court fully appreciates the manner in which the learned counsel rendered assistance in the just decision of the case.
Sri Anil Kumar Singh, learned Counsel for the appellant whom we found to be sound in law, exhibited extreme sobriety in making his submissions.
Much that the Court may desire, bound by law, despite persuasive submissions, no relief can be granted to the appellant.
It is a matter of record that the appellant’s allotment for a plot by an Authority constituted under the provisions of Bihar Industrial Area
Development Authority Act, 1974 stood cancelled in the year 2007. Importantly, appellant never laid any challenge to the same or protested such
action of the Authority. It is only in the year 2017 that he filed a writ petition seeking quashing of such an action. The purported cause of action being
rejection of his request for recalling the cancellation.
It is a matter of record that appellant was never put into possession of the plot. The cancellation took place as the property allotted stood mortgaged as
pari-passu, and as a matter of policy decision, the Financial Institution had taken a decision of cancelling all allotments with an endeavour of reviving
the Industrial units. Significantly, the appellant was only a subsequent purchaser not falling within the ambit and scope of such policy.
The learned Single Judge rightly dismissed the writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India on the ground of the delay and laches.
We do not find any error/ perversity in the findings warranting interference with the impugned order dated 1st March, 2019 passed in CWJC
No.19270 of 2017 titled as Usha Liquors Vs. The Bihar Industrial Development Authority & Ors. Hence, for all the aforesaid reasons, the present
appeal stands dismissed.
Interlocutory Application, if any, shall stand disposed of.