c- e'^Qi gr|'| ^' Qrji'y.^ IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR (C.G.) W.P.P.C No.......3.3:s.73..../2010 PETITIONER: ^ RESPONDENTS:^1 I;' ^^ ^0.^-^-" ^y'^ ...-"'..^'" ..r? •^"^ ''^ ,f / M/sS.K Sarawagi & Co. (P) Ltd. A CQmpany Registered under the Indian Companies Act, 1956 through its Additional Director Suresh Agrawal, S/o • Late Shri Raj Kumar Agrawal, Aged about 32 Years, Registered Office OFF-7, 3rd Floor, Ashoka Millenium, Near New Rajendra Nagar,Ring Road No.l Raipur (C.G.) VERSUS State of Chhattisgarh Through the Secretary Department of Commerce and Industries D.K.S. Bhawan, Mantaralaya Raipur (C.G.) Chhattisgarh State Industrial Development Corporation Ltd. A Govemment of Chhattisgarh Undertaking, Through its Managing Director, B-4, M.R. Colony, Shailendra ' Nagar, Raipur (C.G.) ^s 3. Secretary Department of Town and Country Planning D.K.S. Bhawan, Mantralaya Raipur(C.G.) 4. Director Town and Country Planning State of Chhattisgarh Raipur (C.G.) 1 PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF APPROPRIATE WRITS OF MANDAMUS AND CERTIQRARI AND FOR OTHER SUITABLE WRITS AND DIRECTIONS:- HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (C) No. 3383 of2010 PETmONER : M/s. S.K.Sarawagi & Co. (P) Ltd. VERSU8 RESPONDENT8 : State ofChhattisgarh & Others. PETmQNUNDERARTICLE226^F31IECONSTITUrnONOFINDIA SB: Hon'Ne Shri Satish K. Asnihotri, .J. Present: Shii Vamn Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner. Sliri Shashaiik Thakur, Panel La^yer for the State/respondent No. l,3and4. Sliri KashifShakeel, Advocate forthe respondent No. 2. ORDER(ORAL) (Passed on 13 day of July, 2010) By this petition, the petitioner seeks a direction to the respondent No. 2- Chhattisgarh State Industrial Corporation Ltd. (f'or short 'CSIDC') that the application dated 26.04.2008 (Annexiu-e P/16) may be decided m accordance with law and further a mandamus directing the respondent No. 2 to consider the case of the petitioner for allotment of lands situated adjacent to plot No. 38 and 52 at Siltara Industrial Area, Phase II, Raipur. Shri Kashif Shakeel, leamed counsel appearing for the respondent No. 2-C8IDC submits that the petitioner has deliberately not filed earlier coiTespondences made betwcen him and respondent No.2-C8IDC m this regard and reply sent to the petitioner by the respondent No. 2-CSIDC. The conmiumcation dated 18.6.2008 ofthe petitioner addressed to the Managing Director, CSIDC, was replied to on 27.6.2008 stating clearly that the respondent No. 2-C8IDC camiot take aiiy decision on the application of the petitioner as the petition schedule land has not been /s ,-,^—^ .r^"^ ^^~^. -Wi^ ^ ^ ^ ^y ^p-^ "^^^ s 4. allotted to the respondent-CSIDC. Earlier also, vide conmiunications dated 28.12.2007 and 05.11.2007, the respondent No. 2-CSIDC has expressed its inability to allot land to the petitioner, as afforested. One more communication was sent to the petitioner on 16.7.2009 in the same context. All the letters/communications as aforestated have been produced and are taken on record. It appears that the petitioner is making repeatcd requests when the request has ah'eady been responded to by the respondent No. 2-CSIDC asid as such, there can be no direction to the respondent No. 2 to further respond to the sald letters, wliich according to the respondent No. 2, has already been replied as aforestated. Even othei'wise, on the basis ofmere application for allotment of some piece of land, no direction can be issued. It is for the respondents to consider and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. If the application of the petitioner is not maintainable as mdicated by the respondent No. 2 on the ground that 100 acres oflaiid in district Bilaspur, Raipur, Durg and Rajnandgaon in the proposed isidustrial area, has not been transferred to the respondent- C8IDC, no direction in this regard can be issued to the respondent No. 2-C8IDC to consider the case of the petitioner and pass any order in favour ofthe petitioner, or otherwise. For the reasons mentioned hereinabove, the petition is dismissed, being devoid ofmerit, at the motion stage itself Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge Amit