WEST BENGAL ELECTRONIC INDUSTRY Vs. SHANTA PROJECTS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Both these appeals have been preferred by West Bengal Electronics Industries Development Corporation Limited (WEBEL) assailing a common judgment of the learned First Court in two writ petitions brought by the respondents/writ petitioners seeking in substance allotment of certain land for setting up Information Technology related industry. The location where the writ petitioners seek land is at an electronic complex developed in Sector-V, Salt Lake and Rajarhat, on the eastern fringe of the city of Kolkata. Land for IT related industry has been developed in those locations with State initiative. WEBEL came into possession of land of about 87.55 acres in Sector-V of Salt Lake on the basis of an indenture of lease executed in its favour in 19th January, 1987 by the State Government for a period of 999 years. WEBEL had invited applications in the year 1989 from intending organizations/units for setting up electronic industry there. The writ petitioners, however, made an application for allotment on 22nd/24th April, 2004 for about 0.25 acres of land and also deposited earnest money. The petitioners thereafter had made a second application for allotment of an equivalent area in Rajarhat on 30th March, 2005.

(2.) The appellant rejected the application of the writ petitioners for Salt Lake land by a communication dated 19th December, 2007 in the following terms:-

(3.) In W.P.No.895 of 2009 the writ petitioners sought cancellation of the aforesaid letter of 19th December, 2007 and also for approval of their two applications. Main prayer of the writ petitioners was for allotment of land in their favour on the basis of its application dated 22nd April, 2005 and 30th March, 2004. The second application was made in relation to a State Government project for allotting 30 acres of land in Rajarhat meant for small and medium IT and ITES related companies. Advertisement in that regard was published by the appellant on 3rd February, 2005. The project was described as "Knowledge Corridor Phase -I". The aforesaid application was made on the basis of a communication made through an e-mail issued by the IT promotion cell informing the writ petitioner that the application in respect of the knowledge Corridor Project ought to be addressed to the Managing Director WEBEL. That communication by e-mail was made on 28th March, 2005. The complaint of the writ petitioners before the First Court was that in spite of regular follow up no decision was taken in respect of the second application. On the other hand, the writ petitioner no. 1, a private limited company was asked to obtain refund of earnest money by the letter, the text of which we have reproduced earlier in this judgment, so far their first application was concerned.