IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CIVIL WRIT JURISDICTION CASE No.9886 of 2005 ANAND KUMAR TIWARI SON OF LATE SAMPAT KUMAR TIWARI, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE/MOHALLA NEAR ALOK BHARTI SCHOOL BETTIAH, POST OFFICE AND POLICE STATION BETTIAH TOWN, DISTRICT WEST CHAMPARAN….PETITIONER. Versus 1. THE BIHAR STATE FINANCIAL CORPORATION, PATNA THROUGH ITS CHAIRMAN, THE BIHAR STATE FINANCIAL CORPORATION FRAZER ROAD, PATNA-1. 2. THE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT COMMISSIONER-CUM- CHAIRMAN, BIHAR INDUSTRIAL AREA DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY PATNA (BIHAR). 3. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, BIHAR INDUSTRIAL AREA DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, PATNA. 4. THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BIHAR INDUSTRIAL AREA DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, REGIONAL OFFICE BELLA MUZAFFARPUR. 5. THE BIHAR STATE FINANCIAL CORPORATION THROUGH ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, REGION-1 FRASER ROAD PATNA. 6. THE ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER, THE BIHAR STATE FINANCIAL CORPORATION FRAZER ROAD, PATNA. 7. THE BRANCH MANAGER, THE BIHAR STATE FINANCIAL CORPORATION, BRANCH MOTIHARI, AGARAWA……………………….RESPONDENTS. 8. RAJEEV SIKARIA, S/O SRI BHAULI SIKARIA, RESIDENT OF SIKARIA SADAN, LAL BAZAR, P.S. TOWN P.S, DISTT. WEST CHAMPARAN……………INTERVENER- RESPONDENT. For the petitioner : M/s Jitendra Kr.Roy and Lallan Kr.Verma, Advocates. For the B.I.A.D.A : Mr. Lalit Kishore, Sr. Advocate. For the B.S.F.C. : Mr. Raju Giri, Advocate. For respondent no.8 : Mr. Sanjeet Kumar, Advocate. ---------------------------------- 20/ 01.08.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the Bihar State Financial Corporation, learned counsel for the Bihar Industrial Area Development Authority as well as learned counsel for private respondent no.8. 2. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner for directing the respondents authorities to act as per decision dated 18.11.2003 - 2 - in the Board Meeting of the Bihar Industrial Area Development Authority which was issued on 19.02.2004 (Annexure-8) in the matter of transferring the piece of land over which the sick unit in the name and style of M/s Champaran Concrete Product was installed, which was purchased by the petitioner in auction sale from the Bihar State Financial Corporation for which the petitioner had already deposited 25% amount of the total dues of the respondent Corporation in the year 2000 and also deposited 25% amount of the dues of the respondents authorities in the year 2003, but the respondents authorities were not taking any decision for transferring the land/unit in the name of the petitioner. 3. The petitioner has specifically claimed that he had fulfilled all the requirements after auction purchase from the Bihar State Financial Corporation and had also paid the required 25% of the amount to the Bihar Industrial Area Development Authority and hence the land in question should have been transferred to him by the authorities but they have not taken any decision in that regard nor have transferred the land to the petitioner due to which he is suffering. He specifically relies upon Annexure-8 of the writ petition which is a resolution of the meeting of the authority in which it was decided that 20% of the amount would be taken before the allotment of the land and the remaining 80% will be taken thereafter in yearly instalment. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents submits that the said provision of taking 20% from the person concerned is only with respect to the direct allottees of the authority and not for any person who had purchased in auction sale from the Bihar State Financial - 3 - Corporation or any other such institution. He further states that it was the duty of the petitioner to deposit the entire amount with the Authority but he failed to deposit the same in spite of repeated requests, although he was not entitled for fixation of any instalment. He further claims that 25% of the amount deposited by the petitioner had been returned by the authority to the petitioner. He also avers that in the said circumstances the petitioner has no valid claim left with respect to the instant matter as the land also had never been transferred to the petitioner. 5. The return of the money by the Bihar Industrial Area Development Authority to the petitioner is apparent from Annexure-9/A and the demand made by the authority for payment of entire amount is also apparent from letter of the authority dated 04.10.2002 (Annexure-4) and the inaction of petitioner is also apparent from letter sent by the authority concerned dated 08.08.2007 (Annexure-10). 6. In the said circumstances, this court does not find any merit in this writ petition, which is accordingly dismissed. 7. So far the questions of surrender of the charge and payment of the amount due inter se between the Bihar State Financial Corporation and the Bihar Industrial Area Development Authority are concerned, the said authorities may settle it among themselves in terms of the agreement entered into between them. Harish (S.N.Hussain, J.)