AKASH SALT INDUSTRIES Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present Letters Patent Appeals are directed against the order of the learned single Judge, by which the learned single Judge disposed of a group of writ petitions, viz., Special Civil Application Nos. 4455 of 1999, 4456 of 1999, 855 of 2000 and 870 of 2000. Since the issue involved in all the Letters Patent Appeals is same and since they arise out of the common order of the learned single Judge, we are disposing of all these Letters Patent Appeals by this common judgment.

(2.) Two concerns, viz. Messrs. Dolly Salt Industries and Messrs. Akash Salt Industries, applied on 1.12.1995 on long term lease basis certain area admeasuring 330 acres, situated outside Survey No.169 of Village Dhrub, Taluka Mundra, District, Kutch. Both the aforesaid appellants had applied for granting lease in their favour for the purpose of salt pan. Both Messrs. Dolly Salt Industries and Messrs. Akash Salt Industries had applied for granting lease for the same activity, i.e. activity related with salt, and accordingly, they had applied for granting them lease on long term basis. The land in question is situated outside Survey No.169 and according to the aforesaid two applicants, the land in question were not measured. The aforesaid two applicants therafter preferred necessary applications in prescribed form. It is the say of the aforesaid two applicants in their writ petitions, viz., Special Civil Application Nos. 4455 of 1999 and 4456 of 1999, that thereafter, the land in question was measured by the D.L.R. and the true copy of the map is annexed as Annexure `D' in their petitions. Initially, the said application was rejected by the Collector on the ground that the said land was required for the backward class Adivasis. The petitioners therafter again approached the Collector by application dated 1.2.1997 on the ground that the petitioners had not received any communication and that if such local backward class persons are required to be given priority after considering their claim, the balance may be considered for allotment to the petitioners. It is the say of the aforesaid petitioners that the Mamlatdar, by his letter dated 13.5.1997 gave a positive opinion. Still, without giving opportunity of hearing and ignoring the positive report in favour of the said two applicants, the Collector, by his order dated 2.6.1998, rejected the application of both the said applicants by a common order. It was rejected on the ground that the area demanded as well as the appurtenant area come within the scope of the port development and port based industries and that there is a formal demand from the Gujarat Maritime Board. On the said ground, applications were rejected and the demand of the petitioners were accordingly negatived by the Collector. The aforesaid order of the Collector dated 2.6.1998 was carried further by the applicants before the Additional Chief Secretary (Appeals). The Additional Chief Secretary (Appeals), by his order dated 23rd February, 1999, allowed the said revisions and the matter was remanded to the Collector for considering the questions in consonance with the directions and guidelines contained in the Resolution dated 31.12.1981. The order of the Additional Chief Secretary (Appeals) is annexed as Annexure `J' in the petitions filed by the aforesaid two applicants, which is dated 23rd February, 1999. It is the say of the aforesaid two petitioners that in spite of the fact that they have taken No Objection Certificate from various Departments and since they have complied with all the pre-clearances as required, still, the Collector has not taken decision for allotment of the land in their favour and that he is sitting tight over the matter. It is also the say of the petitioners that they have reliably learnt that much after the application of the aforesaid two petitioners, respondents 6 and 7, i.e. Messrs. Adani Chemicals Limited and Messrs. Adani Port Limited, put up their claim for allotment of approximately 500 acres of land abutting towards the seaside about 10 K.Ms. from Survey No.169 of Village Dhrub towards the land, being Port of Navinal Island, for the purpose of Petrochemical Polypropylene Plant. It is the say of the petitioners that the application of respondents 6 and 7 is later in point of time. It is also the say of the petitioners that since the survey was not carried out, the possession is not handed over to the aforesaid two parties, i.e., respondents 6 and 7. It is the say of the petitioners that by order dated 23rd April, 1999, the Collector had allotted approximately 500 acres of land to respondents 6 and 7. It is stated that no such land could have been allotted to respondents 6 and 7 and the said action is absolutely illegal, arbitrary and the same is nothing but favouritism in favour of respondents 6 and 7. It is the say of the petitioners that the Additional Chief Secretary had remanded the matter to the Collector. The Collector was required to pass appropriate order in favour of the petitioners. Instead, he sat tight over the matter by not deciding the matter after the same was remanded by the Additional Chief Secretary. Under these circumstances, the aforesaid two petitioners, i.e. Messrs. Dolly Salt Industries and Messrs. Akash Salt Industries filed respective writ petitions, being Special Civil Application Nos. 4455 of 1999 and 4456 of 1999, before the learned single Judge for a direction against the Collector to forthwith comply with the order of the Additional Chief Secretary, i.e. respondent No.2 in the Special Civil Application, and for allotting necessary land to each of the aforesaid applicants which they have demanded. They have also prayed that the order dated 23rd April, 1999, which is at Annexure `M' to the petition, i.e. the order passed in favour of respondents 6 and 7 of the Special Civil Application, should not be given any effect by the authority. Accordingly, the aforesaid two Special Civil Applications were filed by Messrs. Dolly Salt Industries and Messrs. Akash Salt Industries seeking appropriate direction for allotting the land in question in their favour.

(3.) There are other two writ petitions, viz. Special Civil Application Nos. 855 of 2000 and 870 of 2000, which were filed on behalf of Messrs. Adani Chemicals Limited and Messrs. Adani Port Ltd., arrayed as respondents 6 and 7 in Special Civil Application Nos. 4455 of 1999 and 4456 of 1999. It is the case of the aforesaid two petitioners in their Special Civil Applications that the said petitioners are Public Limited Companies, registered under the Companies Act, 1956, that on 10th January, 1994, permission for captive jetty was granted to them and on 11th September, 1996, No Objection Certificate was issued in their favour by the Gujarat Maritime Board. On 30.12.1996, the petitioners made an application to the concerned Mamlatdar for allotment of land of 500 acres. On 12th September, 1997, the Gujarat Maritime Board wrote a letter to the Collector of Bhuj, instructing him not to allot any of the lands within the port area. The said petitioners had deposited the amount towards the price of land and obtained a receipt on 10th December, 1997. The State Government issued Notification dated 21st January, 1998, declaring the Port limit. On 1st June, 1998, Gujarat Maritime Board wrote a letter to the petitioners to utilise the land in question only for the purpose of Port related and Port development activity. The petitioners on 9th June, 1998, requested to change their user from Industrial use to Port back up and related use, and the said request was granted. It is also their case that on 29th January, 1999, the Gujarat Maritime Board issued a letter mentioning that the land is earmarked for development of Mundra Port. On 23rd February, 1999, the District Collector issued order, allotting the land in question in favour of the petitioners. According to the petitioners, therefore, the Additional Chief Secretary, Revenue Department (Appeals) should not have remanded the matter for consideration in favour of the aforesaid two salt manufacturers, as, according to these petitioners, the land which they have demanded overlaps with the land which have already been allotted to these petitioners. The order of the Additional Chief Secretary dated 2nd March, 1999 is also, therefore, challenged by way of filing these two writ petitions, viz., Special Civil Application Nos. 855 of 2000 and 870 of 2000.