DISTRICT INDUSTRIES ASSOCIATION Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this writ petition filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, petitioner prays for quashing of the impugned tender notice dated 29-1-2001 (Annexure P-1) whereby respondent No. 2, the Madhya Pradesh Financial Corporation, has invited bidders for sale of various units in lieu of non-payment of outstanding loan amounts. The petitioner submits that he is the President of District Industries Association, Bilaspur, which has been formed for the welfare of various industries including those mentioned in the advertisement dated 29-1-2001 published in daily Navbharat, dated 30-1-2001. The petitioner further submits that separate Financial Corporation for the State of Chhattisgarh is likely to be reconstituted and while so reconstituting, some policy may be adopted as such it contends that auction should not take place.

(2.) Annexure P-1 is the list of Industries to be auctioned which has been published vide advertisement dated 29-1-2001. The respondents have filed the return and have raised objections regarding the maintainability of the petition. It is stated by the respondents that pursuant to the advertisement, tenders have already been opened on 19-2-2001. The respondents have submitted that the petition though filed in the name of District Industries Association, Bilaspur, which is really in the nature of a petition filed by its President in his individual capacity, but there is no legal representation nor any authorisation in that behalf. It is pointed out that the petitioner has not been able to show which of the industries mentioned in Annexure P-1 are its members and which of the industries have authorised or requested it to file the present petition. Each industry has been established on its own, having separate entity. It is further pointed out in Paragraph 3 of return that the loans borrowed by each Industry had become overdue and many of which were taken over as back as in the year 1995 for their disposal before their value is deteriorated. It is contended in para 4 that the petition also deserves to be dismissed on the ground that the petitioner may at the most represent the industries of Bifaspur whereas the advertisement (Annexure P-1) also contains the industries of other areas like Raipur, Jagdalpur, Durg, etc. It is further pointed out in para 5 that each individual industry is such which can litigate its own grievance, but not by one petition because each individual industry was served with notice being individual case and many of them submitted their replies and have pursued their remedies available and if at all required have to present their own case keeping in view peculiar and distinct case and they are capable of doing so, as such this petition is not maintainable.

(3.) Details of brief history in respect of each industry have been cumulatively filed vide Annexure R-1. It is relevant here to reproduce the facts contained in Annexure R-1 for just adjudication of this petition. Details of brief history of each industry arc as under: