- (1.) THE appellant had prayed for quashing of the notice published in the Newspaper on 21st January, 2005 and 7th February, 2005 whereby the Bihar State Credit and Investment Corporation Limited (hereinafter referred to as "BICICO") had decided to put the Unit of the appellant -petitioner on lease to intending parties and also to put the said Unit for auction sale. The learned single Judge has chosen not to interfere with the matter since the appellant -petitioner had not made any substantial payment against the amount which they had obtained from BICICO.
(2.) THIS appeal has been preferred by the writ petitioner challenging the said order of the learned single Judge. Appearing in support of the appeal, Mr. Delip Jerath submits that the learned single Judge ought to have considered the offer of one time settlement which had been made by the BICICO which the appellant -petitioner could not avail of on account of the method used in calculating the amount claimed to be payable on account of such one time settlement. Admittedly, the said Scheme for payment on the basis of one time settlement was valid till 31st March, 2005, but, at the same time, the petitioner has been pursuing his remedy before this Court by way of writ application in respect of such one time settlement. As will appear from Annexure 13 to the memorandum of appeal, as sum of Rs. 87,83,000.00 was payable, according to BICICO, on account of such one time settlement. The said figure has been disputed on behalf of the appellant and in Paragraph -35 of the memorandum of appeal; the figure as computed by the appellant has been set out as against the total claim made by the BICICO. From the comparative statement of the two, it will be evident that certain amount had not been credited in the calculation made by the BICICO and, accordingly, on recalculation, it was noticed that a sum of approximately Rs. 75,00,000.00 (Rupees Seventy Five lacs) would be payable by the appellant to BICICO by way of such one time settlement.
(3.) LEARNED counsel for the BICICO was directed on the last occasion to take instructions as to whether the BICICO shall be agreeable to one time settlement as offered earlier. Today when the matter is taken up, Mr. Das, appearing on behalf of the BICICO has urged that while his client is willing to accept the Scheme of one time settlement, the method on which the last calculation has been made, requires revision on account of the fact that the claim has been made on the basis that the appellant Unit was a non -commissioned Unit, whereas on the other hand the Unit in question was a fully commissioned operative Unit. Mr. Das 'ssubmission has been vehemently opposed by Mr. Jerath, learned counsel for the appellant. According to him, the loan has been obtained by the appellant in respect of a Clinker Manufacturing Plant which was to be set up in the Cement Plant and the said Clinker Plant has not been set up and was, therefore, a non -commissioned Unit.;