- (1.) This interlocutory application has been preferred by M/s. Alliance Industries seeking permission to intervene in L.P.A. No. 344 of 2014. Heard Mr. Rupesh Singh, learned counsel for the proposed intervenor and Mr. Sumeet Gadodia, learned counsel for the appellant - M/s. P.P.G. Steel Pvt. Ltd. Mr. Rupesh Singh, learned counsel for the proposed intervenor has submitted that the auction sale of the mortgaged/hypotheticated assets of M/s. Fancam Engineers was carried out by Bihar State Financial Corporation in favour of M/s. Gyan Press Metal Pvt. Ltd. Learned counsel submits that at the request of the Director of M/s. Gyan Press Metal Pvt. Ltd., the proposed intervenor had accepted the proposal of re -payment to B.S.F.C. on behalf of M/s. Gyan Press Metal Pvt. Ltd. with a condition to transfer the said land in favour of Alliance Industries. Learned counsel further submits that the Director of M/s. Gyan Press Metal Pvt. Ltd. - Mr. Yashpal Singh had defrauded M/s. Alliance Industries and got the land of M/s. Fancam Engineers re -allotted in his name. Learned counsel further submits that behind the back of the proposed intervenor, Mr. Yashpal Singh had entered into a similar transaction with M/s. P.P.G. Steel Pvt. Ltd. assuring him transfer of the assets of M/s. Fancam Engineers. It has further been submitted that the entire act of M/s. Gyan Press Metal Pvt. Ltd. in connivance of M/s. P.P.G. Steel Pvt. Ltd. was in order to keep the proposed intervenor in the dark and it was deliberately not made a party in the writ application. Since the proposed intervenor is going to be affected by any order passed by this Court with respect to the present appeal, it being a necessary party deserves to be impleaded as a party -respondent. At this, Mr. Sumeet Gadodia, learned counsel for the appellant - M/s. P.P.G. Steel Pvt. Ltd. submits that the proposed intervenor is never an interested party and the entire transaction with respect to the transfer of land by M/s. Gyan Press Metal Pvt. Ltd. to M/s. P.P.G. Steel Pvt. Ltd. does not concern the proposed intervenor as he also does not have any legal right to claim handing over/surrender/re -allotment of the land in its favour. In the writ application preferred by M/s. P.P.G. Steel Pvt. Ltd., the proposed intervenor was never made a party. The entire episode with respect to re -allotment of the land is between the private players M/s. Gyan Press Metal Pvt. Ltd. and M/s. P.P.G. Steel Pvt. Ltd. Although the lease deed of the proforma respondent was cancelled vide order dated 07.09.2013 by the Managing Director, AIADA, the Alliance Industries Ltd. neither filed any intervention application nor has been able to show as to how the proposed intervenor is an interested party. Merely because contention has been raised with respect to auction sale of M/s. Fancam Engineers Ltd. by M/s. Gyan Press Metal Pvt. Ltd., the proposed intervenor at this stage cannot claim itself of being a necessary party to the present proceedings. Accordingly, this application being devoid of any merit is hereby dismissed. L.P.A. Nos. 344 & 345 of 2014: Both these appeals arise out of a common order dated 06.08.2014 passed in W.P.(C) No. 1181 of 2014 with W.P.(C) No. 1273 of 2014 and therefore, the appeals are being disposed of by this common order.
(2.) The facts appearing in both the cases are intertwined and which are referred to in the following paragraphs:
(3.) M/s. Fancam Engineers, Hindustan Building, Jamshedpur was allotted plot No. M -8, 6th Phase, Adityapur Industrial Area, Gamharia having an area of 1.5 acres by Adityapur Industrial Area Development Authority (hereinafter referred to as the 'AIADA' for the sake of brevity) vide letter No. 2577 dated 30.08.1996 and accordingly possession of the said plot was delivered to M/s. Fancam Engineers on 09.11.1996. M/s. Gyan Press Metal Private Ltd. (Petitioner in W.P.(C) No. 1273 of 2014) purchased the mortgaged/hypotheticated assets of M/s. Fancam Engineers from Bihar State Financial Corporation, Patna vide letter dated 03.05.2000 on failure of M/s. Fancam Engineers to repay the loan of financial corporation. Pursuant to the purchase of the mortgaged/hyotheticated assets by M/s. Gyan Press Metal Private Ltd., the allotment of plot No. M -8, 6th phase, Adityapur Industrial Area was considered by AIADA in terms of the approval of the Project Clearance Committee/Land Allotment Committee in its meeting held on 04.03.2005. Vide letter No. 1693/ADA dated 01.08.2005 issued by AIADA, the possession of the land was given to M/s. Gyan Press Metal Pvt. Ltd. on 04.12.2008 and a lease deed dated 22.03.2010 was also executed by AIADA in favour of M/s. Gyan Press Metal Pvt. Ltd. Since M/s. Gyan Press Metal Pvt. Ltd. could not run its industrial unit and no longer required the land for the purpose of which it was leased out, in exercise of its power under Clause 6(v) of the lease deed executed a deed of surrender dated 07.09.2010 for re -allotment of the land in favour of M/s. P.P.G. Steel Pvt. Ltd. (writ petitioner in W.P.(C) No. 1181 of 2014). An approval was also sought for by M/s. Gyan Press Metal Pvt. Ltd. from the Managing Director, AIADA intimating him about the deed of surrender with a request to re -allot the plot in question to M/s. P.P.G. Steel Pvt. Ltd. M/s. P.P.G. Steel Pvt. Ltd. had also requested AIADA vide letter dated 08.09.2010 to process its application for re -allotment of the land in its favour. In the 100th meeting of the Board of Directors of AIADA held on 23.02.2011, a decision was taken not to allot land on the basis of deed of surrender and accordingly, further process for re -allotment of the land in favour of M/s. P.P.G. Steel Pvt. Ltd. was suspended. However, in its 101st meeting held on 30.09.2011, the Board of Directors had reconsidered the case of 17 industrial units for transfer of lease/re -allotment pursuant to the deed of surrender including that of M/s. Gyan Press Metal Pvt. Ptd. and a decision was taken at the said meeting to consider and re -allot the lands in question in favour of 17 industrial units including M/s. P.P.G. Steel Pvt. Ltd. and the said decision was taken in terms of Clause 6(v) of the lease deed. AIADA in its letter dated 08.02.2012 issued a show -cause notice to M/s. Gyan Press Metal Pvt. Ltd. to reply as to why the allotment in its favour should not be cancelled as the production of the industrial unit had not commenced. Reply was duly given bringing to the notice of AIADA, the fact that a deed of surrender in favour of M/s. P.P.G. Steel Pvt. Ltd. was already executed. The Managing Director of AIADA vide his order dated 07.09.2013 cancelled the lease deed of M/s. Gyan Press Metal Pvt. Ltd. on the ground that it has violated the terms and conditions of the land allotment order and the lease deed including violation of the terms and conditions of the industrial policy. M/s. P.P.G. Steel Pvt. Ltd. being aggrieved by the order of the Managing Director of AIADA dated 07.09.2013 preferred an appeal being Appeal No. 17 of 2013 before the Secretary, Department of Industries which however was dismissed on 28.01.2014 treating the appeal as not maintainable at the instance of M/s. P.P.G. Steel Pvt. Ltd. as it was never the allottee of the land in question.;