- (1.) Aggrieved by order passed by the Secretary, Department of Industries, Government of Jharkhand on 2.3.2013, whereby the appeal preferred by the petitioner has been rejected and the orders dated 18.5.2013 and 18.6.2013 passed by the said authority, the present writ petition has been filed. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that on 29.8.2002, the lease-deed was executed with Mrs. Jyoti Sinha for a, piece of land at Ranchi for setting up an edible oil factory. The said industry could not be set up and vide letter dated 23.2.2006 a fresh proposal for production of Mushroom was submitted which was entertained by the respondent-authority and the same was forwarded to the M.S.M.E. Development Institutes, Kokar. The allegation against the lessee is that she did not respond to letters written by the M.S.M.E. Development Institutes and the notices issued by the respondent-authority. It is submitted that due to illness of the lessee, the lessee could not respond to the aforesaid notices and the appellate authority vide order dated 2.3.2013 dismissed Appeal No. 25 of 2012 for default. It is further submitted that applications seeking recall of order dated 2.3.2013 as well as application seeking review of order dated 2.3.2013 were also dismissed by the appellate authority and therefore, constrained, the petitioner who is a duly constituted power of attorney holder, has approached this Court.
(2.) Ms. Shweta Singh, the learned counsel for the respondent-authority refers to show-cause notice dated 15.7.2009 and submits that in spite of several notices, the petitioner did not respond to the same and therefore, the lease was cancelled vide order dated 8.7.2011. Seriously objecting to the challenge by the petitioner, the learned counsel submits that no interference is required in the matter.
(3.) From the impugned order dated 2.3.2013 in Appeal No. 25 of 2012, it appears that the petitioner did not appear in the proceeding of Appeal No. 25 of 2012 on 20.10.2012, 3.11.2012 and 9.2.2013. Challenging the order of cancellation of lease-deed, the petitioner approached this court W.P.(C) No. 5368 of 2011, which was permitted to be withdrawn on 2.7.2012 to enable the petitioner to prefer appeal. It is not in dispute that the petitioner was allotted a piece of land and a lease-deed was executed on 29.8.2002 for setting up an industry. The period for lease-deed is 30 years however, the lease-deed has been terminated on the ground of breach of the conditions of lease-deed. Though the application seeking recall of order dated 2.3.2013 and the application seeking review of order dated 2.3.2013 were misconceived, I am of the opinion that dismissal of appeal preferred by the petitioner would entail serious civil consequences to the petitioner. Appeal No. 25 of 2012 was preferred by the petitioner in pursuance of statutory remedy provided under Section 6(2)(a) of the Bihar Industrial Development Authority Act, 1974. Considering the above facts, the orders impugned in the present writ petition are set-aside. Appeal No. 25 of 2012 is restored to its original file. The appellate authority after issuing notice to the petitioner shall decide the appeal on merits, in accordance with law.;