RATAN DEVI TAPADIA Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition has been filed for quashing letter dated 24.05.2005 (Annexure -3) issued by the Divisional Head, Industrial Development Corporation, Rourkela Division by which the decision was taken by opposite parties to cancel the lease of industrial plot bearing No.486 measuring Ac.1.85 decimals in the Kalunga Industrial area in Sundargarh district. The petitioner further prays for quashing letters dated 12.09.2008 and 02.12.2008 under Annexure -24 and Annexure -27 respectively refusing to regularise the ownership of the Unit and directing the petitioner to take back the deposits made by her towards HP dues given on 30.06.2008 and Annexure -27 issued by opposite party No.3 -the Divisional Head, Industrial Development Corporation, Orissa (for short, 'IDCO').

(2.) PETITIONER 's case in a nutshell is that late Brij Gopal Tapadia, who was the proprietor of M/s Wooden -N -Wooden, applied for lease of an industrial plot in Kalunga Industrial Area of Sundargarh district to District Industries Centre, Sundargarh (for short, 'DIC') for setting up his Unit. He was allotted with a piece of land measuring Ac.1.85 decimals pertaining to Plot no.486 in village: Beladihi under Kalunga Developed Area vide allotment letter No.2085 dated 16.06.1979 for the purpose of establishment of Timber Product Industry subject to the terms and conditions as stated in the said allotment letter. As per the terms and conditions laid down in the allotment letter, the petitioner submitted an undertaking pursuant to which she was put in possession over the aforesaid leasehold land on 11.07.1979 in presence of the General Manager, DIC, Sundargarh. While the matter stood thus, on 06.06.1986, the original allottee, namely, Sri B.G.Tapadia passed away due to a massive cardiac arrest, his wife, the present petitioner took over the business of M/s Wooden -N -Wooden. The said industrial plot allotted in favour of late B.G.Tapadia was developed by making huge expenditure over a period of time. While the petitioner was running her business in the year 2005, for the first time, opposite party No.3 -IDCO being came into existence issued letter No.1025 dated 29.04.2005 in the name of late B.G. Tapadia asking him to show cause as to why the allotment shall not be cancelled. Petitioner's case is that she has not received any such letter. Opposite party No.3 again issued another letter No.1377 dated 24.05.2005 (Annexure -3) stating therein that allotment of Plot No.468 has been cancelled and in the said letter further request was made to handover the vacant possession of the land in question from all encumbrances within fifteen days from the date of issuance of such letter. On receiving such letter under Annexure -3, the petitioner through her power of attorney holder submitted her reply stating that she has not received the letter dated 29.04.2005 referred in Annexure -3 and further requested to grant time up to 31.07.2005 for clearing up of the outstanding dues payable to IDCO. Again on 25.08.2005, the petitioner wrote a letter to opposite party No.3 requesting him to extend the time up to 30.09.2005 to complete the lease agreement formalities as the banker has assured to give another loan after the proposal is approved by their regional office at Bhubaneswar. In the meantime, on being asked by the IDCO office, the petitioner applied for change of ownership of plot No.468 allotted in favour of her late husband. For such transfer she has also complied with all the formalities required to be fulfilled by her. The Andhra Bank had advanced a loan to M/s Wooden -N -Wooden and for recovery of such loan amount, the Bank had filed a suit against the petitioner as well as against the IDCO bearing T.M.S. No.77/84 in the Court of Sub -Judge (now Civil Judge, Sr. Division), Rourkela. As against the judgment and decree passed in the said suit, the Andhra Bank filed F.A. No.282/91 before this Court. Upon receipt of the letter of the petitioner dated 19.09.2005, opposite party No.3 communicated with the Chief General Manager of opposite party No.2 vide letter dated 21.09.2005 stating therein that after initial allotment of the plot in question on 16.06.1979, the physical possession was handed over to the Unit on 23.07.1979 by the General Manager, DIC, Sundargarh and the F.A. No.282/91 is running between Andhra Bank Vs. Mrs. Ratan Tapadia and others. The Chief General Manager, IDCO, Bhubaneswar vide letter dated 24.11.2005 wrote to the Divisional Head of IDCO, Rourkela that the affidavit sworn before the Notary in property dealing is not acceptable. Similarly, the unauthenticated copies of the "Disclaimers" are also not acceptable and the party may be advised to clear the outstanding dues of IDCO first. Moreover, since the FA No.282/91 is sub -judice in the High Court at that stage approval of change of ownership may not be desirable. The wife of late B.G. Tapadia, the present petitioner, is the sole and absolute owner of the unit. The parties of FA No.282/91 agreed for settlement of compromise and in that context the Andhra Bank communicated to the petitioner vide letter dated 24.07.2006 intimating that they are taking steps to withdraw the appeal pending before this Court. Vide letter dated 05.10.2006 the petitioner communicated to opposite party No.3 that the First Appeal No.282/91 has been allowed to be withdrawn by this court vide order dated 22.08.2006 and the Andhra Bank has no outstanding dues against the petitioner. Opposite Party No.3 vide its letter dated 09.11.2006 advised the petitioner to pay a sum of Rs.11,41,482/ - to adjust the outstanding dues by 30.11.2006. Accordingly, a cheque bearing No.026412 dated 27.11.2006 drawn on UTI Bank, Rourkela for Rs.11,41,482/ - was issued by one Smt. Uma Agrawal (Partner) on behalf of M/s Wooden -N -Wooden.

(3.) EARLIER challenging the action of opposite parties, the petitioner approached this Court by filing W.P.(C) No.12731 of 2007 with a prayer to quash the decisions under Annexures -3 and 18. This Court vide order dated 11.10.2007 issued notice to opposite parties and was also pleased to stay the further proceeding of the said EUO Case pending before opposite party No.5. During pendency of the said writ petition, the petitioner applied for regularization of her ownership under one time settlement scheme prepared and adopted by IDCO along with token deposit of Rs.50,000/ -. Since the petitioner was staying in Mumbai, she authorised her Manager, Sri Shankarlal Agarwal with intimation to the Divisional Head, IDCO, Rourkela to submit the one time settlement proposal on 04.04.2008.