LP VANIA Vs. GUJARAT INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENTCORPN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners are aggrieved from inaction on the part of the respondents, vide which, respondents- Gujarat Industrial Development Corporation (hereinafter referred to as "GIDC") has failed to implement the scheme regarding disposal of land vested under it.

(2.) The land of survey no. 2063 of Wadhwan taluka, District Surendranagar, came to be occupied by respondent no. 1- GIDC for an industrial estate, and accordingly, industrial plots of 500 sq. yards and 1000 sq. yards were carved out. Out of the aforementioned plots, 16 plots were allotted to different persons as per the resolution of the State Government. The petitioners belonging to the weaker section of society, desirous of setting up their business, moved applications in the year 1999 for allotment of such plots, and accordingly, deposited Rs. 10,000/- each, as required under the policy. The respondents, vide their resolution, accepted the applications of the petitioners and issued communication in this regard in the month of April, 1999. Respective copies of such acceptance letters are annexed with the petition. It seems that, thereafter, someone from the respondent GIDC, raised up a point that area of the plots admeasuring 500 sq. yards may be too big for the petitioners, and accordingly suggested that in lieu of 500 sq. yards, the petitioners can be allotted plots admeasuring 300 sq. yards. It was also pointed out that, as such, reduction in size will be against the original plan, the necessary approval from the Municipality in this regard be taken. It will be relevant to point out that the things did not move further, and as a result, the petitioners remain deprived of the plots applied by them. It is further the case of the petitioners that in the year 2001, the respondent GIDC allotted some of the plots to respondent no. 3 Trust engaged in charitable activities. It is the grievance of the petitioners that allotment of plots to the Trust was against the policy of GIDC as none of the purpose mentioned in the notification was going to be served by such allotment.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that there was no reason for respondent-GIDC not to have allotted the plots to the petitioners in view of the fact that the petitioners have complied with all formalities as required in the notification available at Annexure-A. According to him, some of the plots were still lying vacant but as the petitioners being persons from lower strata of the society are being deprived of allotments of plots. He has drawn attention to the earlier interim order passed by this Court in the year 2015, wherein, it has been said that "it appears that 15 years time has elapsed and the people belonging to Scheduled Castes is unequally treated in the State by the GIDC". According to him, allotment of industrial plots to respondent no. 3 Trust and depriving the petitioners from such allotment when applications made by them prior in time were pending was nothing but violation of the own policy of the GIDC. Finally, it has been argued that the allotment made in favour of respondent no. 3 trust be cancelled and the plots allotted to respondent no. 3 Trust be allotted to the petitioners.