- (1.) The matter had waited for sometime in this the fourth round of litigation between the parties since it appeared at the initial stage that a solution could be found.
(2.) The facts are not much in dispute. Food parks were supposed to be set up at Dankuni, Siliguri and elsewhere in the State. A plot of land was allotted by the Kolkata Metropolitan Development Authority to the petitioner company for setting up a city office for the forward and backward integration of the food parks and their activities. The dispute now pertains to the plot allotted for the city office. Apparently, a draft project report was submitted by the petitioner company on the basis of which the allotment of the land for the city office was made. In course of submitting a final plan, the petitioner company sought to describe the proposed city office complex as "City Office cum Commercial Complex".
(3.) The KMDA authorities took umbrage at the petitioner's attempt to exploit the space allotted in connection with the food parks for possible purposes not connected with the food parks and purported to cancel the allotment by an order of October 23, 2006. Such order was challenged under Article 226 of the Constitution and this Court set aside the order on the ground that the petitioner company had neither been informed of the impending cancellation nor permitted to be heard before the cancellation order was issued.;