G S ENGINEERING WORKS Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Whether the petitioner is entitled to be allotted an industrial plot at Faridabad as of right is the only question which arises for adjudication in this petition filed by M/s G.S. Engineering Works for quashing the order dated 5.11.1998 passed by the Commissioner and Secretary to Government of Haryana Town and Country Planning Department.

(2.) The facts necessary for deciding the above noted question are that the project report submitted by the petitioner for setting up an industrial unit in Faridabad appears to have been approved by the Director of Industries, Haryana some time in 1982 and on his recommendation, the Government appears to have agreed to allot an industrial plot measuring 1/4 acre. However, the letter of allotment could not be issued to the petitioner because the land out of which the plot was to be allotted was under dispute. After about 2 years, the Estate Officer, Haryana Urban Development Authority, Faridabad (hereinafter described as 'the Estate Officer') wrote memo dated 26.5.1984 (Annexure P.3) to the petitioner requiring it to apply afresh for allotment of plot in Section 58, Faridabad so that the Screening Committee may take appropriate decision. It is not clear from the record whether the petitioner submitted any application in pursuance of the said memo but after a lull of one decade, the Estate of Officer issued memo No. 1109 dated 1.7.1994 and revived the offer of allotment of the plot to the petitioner. A perusal of the photostat copy of the said memo which was produced by the learned counsel during the course of arguments, shows that the petitioner was called upon to submit letter of acceptance to the Estate Officer within 30 days with clear stipulation that its failure to do so would lead to the presumption that the offer is' not acceptable to it. For reference purposes, memo No. l109 dated 1.7.1994 is reproduced below:-

(3.) Shri I.K. Mehta, Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner, challenged the legality and correctness of the orders passed by the Estate Officer and the Revisional Authority by arguing that the decision of the Estate Officer to cancel the offer of allotment made to the petitioner is wholly arbitrary and capricious. He submitted that the petitioner cannot be arbitrarily deprived of the valuable right acquired on the basis of the direction given by the government to the authorities of H.U.D.A. to allot to it an industrial plot at Faridabad. Shri Mehta further submitted that the action of the respondents to offer allotment of plot to the petitioner in an area which was under dispute was itself arbitrary and in any case, after having made an offer to allot alternative plot, the respondents cannot refuse to issue letter of allotment on the pretext that the petitioner did not communicate its acceptance in response to the memo dated 1.7.1994 or that he did not deposit the exorbitant price fixed by the respondent. Still further, he argued that the decision of the Estate Officer to cancel the offer made to the petitioner vide memo dated 1.7.1994 should be declared nullity on the ground of violation of the principles of natural justice because no action-oriented notice and opportunity of hearing was given to the petitioner before the impugned decision was taken. Shri Mehta invited our attention to the documents filed with the petition to show that the petitioner had repeatedly requested the Estate Officer to disclose the plot number and the amount required to be deposited but the latter did not pay any heed to its request and arbitrarily cancelled the offer of allotment. Learned counsel also read out the contents of the memo of appeal filed by the petitioner before the Administrator, Haryana Urban Development Authority, Faridabad to substantiate his assertion that after receiving the memo dated 1.7.1994, the petitioner was in constant touch with the Estate Officer in the context of offer of alternative plot. Shri Mehta assailed the order of the revisional authority by arguing that has upset the order passed by the Appellate Authority without any cogent reason.