Arps Engineering v. Tamil Nadu Small Industries
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 24.06.2022
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R.VIJAYAKUMAR and M.P(MD)No.1 of 2011 ARPS Engineering Enterprises, L6, Electrical & Electronic Industrial Estate, Represented by its Managing Director, V.Prema Latha ... Petitioner Vs.
1.Tamil Nadu Small Industries Development Corporation Limited, (A Government of Tamil Nadu undertaking), Represented by its Branch Manager, SIDCO Industrial Estate, Ariya Mangalam, Trichy-620 010.
2.Tamil Nadu Small Industrial Development, Corporation Limited, Represented by its Chairman and Managing Director, Near SIDCO Electronics Complex, Thiruvika Industrial Estate, Guindy, Chennai-600 032.
... Respondents PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to 1/6
quash the impugned notice of demand dated 21.09.2011 issued by the first respondent and to consider the petitioner's representation dated 05.08.2011 and direct the respondents to handover the plot bearing No.E-3 at SIDCO Industrial Estate, Vazhavanthankottai. For Petitioner : Mr.M.N.Ram Kumar For Respondents : Mr.T.Sakthi Kumaran for R1
ORDER
The present petition has been filed challenging an order passed by the Tamil Nadu Small industries Development Corporation, under which an additional amount was demanded from the petitioner, who was allotted as industrial plot on a tentative cost on 08.03.2007. While the writ petition is pending, the respondent corporation has presented a working sheet, under which they have arrived at a different amount, which is higher than the amount demanded in the impugned order.
2. According to the learned counsel for the respondent, from the date of allotment, the writ petitioner has to complete the entire payment 2/6
within a period of two (2) years. Since the said process has not been complied with by the writ petitioner, the respondent corporation has enhanced the cost of the plot. According to the learned counsel for the respondent, the corporation is entitled to enhance the said amount in view of the fact that only a tentative cost was arrived at the time of allotment.
3. The learned counsel for the respondent has also produced a working sheet to the effect that from the date of actual demand of the enhanced amount, interest has been levied. The respondent corporation has also levied interest for the non payment of the amount, which was originally made in the allotment order. In view of the subsequent events, the impugned order does not survive as on today.
4. In view of the submission of the learned counsel for the respondent corporation, the impugned order, dated 21.09.2011 is set aside and the matter is remitted back to the file of the respondent corporation. The respondent corporation, after giving an opportunity to 3/6
the writ petitioner may pass an order fixing the correct value of the land and they may also consider any concession that may be available to the writ petitioner as per the existing provisions and the scheme.
5. With the above said observations, this Writ Petition stands allowed. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.
24.06.2022 Index :
Yes / No Internet :
Yes / No gbg 4/6
To 1.The Branch Manager, Tamil Nadu Small Industries Development Corporation Limited, (A Government of Tamil Nadu undertaking), SIDCO Industrial Estate, Ariya Mangalam, Trichy-620 010.
2.Tamil Nadu Small Industrial Development, Corporation Limited, Represented by its Chairman and Managing Director, Near SIDCO Electronics Complex, Thiruvika Industrial Estate, Guindy, Chennai-600 032.
5/6
R.
VIJAYAKUMAR ,J.
gbg Order made in 24.06.2022 6/6