Madras High Court
M/S.Jcbl Marrel Tippers Pvt. Ltd vs The Managing Director on 5 March, 2024
Author: D.Bharatha Chakravarthy
Bench: Sanjay V.Gangapurwala, D.Bharatha Chakravarthy
WA No.2952 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 05.03.2024
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.SANJAY V.GANGAPURWALA, CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY
WA No.2952 of 2021
and CMP Nos.20052 and 20053 of 2021
M/s.JCBL Marrel Tippers Pvt. Ltd.,
Rep. by its Authorised Signatory,
Mr.Mani Sundaram-AGM-HR,
Plot No.B-7/1, SIPCOT Industrial Growth
Centre, Oragadam, Sriperumbudur-602105. .. Appellant
-vs-
1. The Managing Director,
State Industries Promotion Corporation
of Tamilnadu Ltd., No.19-A, Rukmani
Lakshmipathy Road, Egmore,
Chennai 600 028.
2. The Estate Officer,
State Industries Promotion Corporation
of Tamilnadu Ltd., Oragadam, Sriperumbudur. .. Respondents
Prayer: Writ appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent
against the order of the learned Single Judge dated 24.09.2021
passed in W.P.No.4131 of 2021.
For the Appellant : Mr.V.P.Sengottuvel, Senior Counsel
for Mr.Krishna Ravindran
Page 1 of 6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WA No.2952 of 2021
For the Respondents : Mr.Abishek Murthy
Stdg. Counsel
*****
JUDGMENT
(Delivered by the Hon'ble Chief Justice)
We have heard Mr.V.P.Sengottuvel, learned counsel for the
appellant and Mr.Abishek Murthy, learned standing counsel for the
respondents.
2. The present appellant had filed the writ petition challenging
the communication dated 21.01.2021. Under the said
communication, the SIPCOT alleged that the petitioner has not
completed the project within the prescribed period. The said default
amounts to non-observance and breach of conditions of Lease Deed
and non-compliance of the terms of Allotment Order/Lease Deed.
Under the said communication, the petitioner was directed to show
cause as to why the allotment of the plot should not be cancelled
and/or to resume the land.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
3. The writ petition filed by the petitioner was dismissed under
the impugned order by the learned Single Judge.
4. The learned senior advocate for the appellant submits that
there is no power to impose/levy penalty. The non-completion of the
project was because of force majeure. It is submitted that the
allotment letter was issued on 20.03.2020, just three days before the
outbreak of Covid-19 pandemic. It was on 23.03.2020 the country-
wide lockdown was imposed and all activities came to a stand-still.
There was no way the project could have been completed by
December, 2020.
5. According to the learned counsel for the respondents, the
allotment to the appellant company was in the year 2006. The
transfer of allotment was accepted upon the condition that the project
would be implemented by December, 2020. The same was not
implemented. The learned counsel further submits that the impugned
communication is only a show cause notice. In fact, the petitioner/
appellant ought to have filed a reply to the show cause notice and the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
authorities would have considered the reply. According to the learned
counsel, if the petitioner/appellant files a reply to the show cause
notice, the authorities would re-consider the same.
6. The learned senior advocate for the appellant submits that
the project has been implemented completely.
7. It appears, in view of the submissions made, that the project
has been implemented and for the delay caused in implementing the
project, one of the reasons given by the appellant, is Covid-19
pandemic. The learned Single Judge had directed payment of
penalty. However, the penalty was not at all imposed by the
respondent SIPCOT. It was only a show cause notice that was issued.
8. As it is contended that the project has already been
implemented and the impugned notice is only a show cause notice
and no penalty was determined by the respondent SIPCOT nor the
allotment was cancelled, we pass the following order:
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
a) The impugned order of the learned Single Judge qua the
petitioner/appellant is quashed and set aside;
b) The petitioner/appellant shall file a reply to the show cause
notice dated 21.01.2021 within a period of fifteen days from
today;
c) The respondent shall consider the reply filed by the petitioner
to the show cause notice and shall take a decision pursuant to
the said show cause notice on its own merits in accordance with
law and policy.
The writ appeal accordingly stands partly allowed. There shall
be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous
petitions are closed.
(S.V.G., CJ.) (D.B.C., J.)
05.03.2024
Index : Yes/No
Neutral Citation : Yes/No
sra
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
THE HON'BLE CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, J.
(sra)
To
1. The Managing Director,
State Industries Promotion Corporation
of Tamilnadu Ltd., No.19-A, Rukmani
Lakshmipathy Road, Egmore,
Chennai 600 028.
2. The Estate Officer,
State Industries Promotion Corporation
of Tamilnadu Ltd., Oragadam, Sriperumbudur.
05.03.2024
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
