Patna High Court
The Bihar Industrial Area Development ... vs I.G. Foods And Beverage Pvt. Ltd., ... on 29 April, 2025
Author: Partha Sarthy
Bench: Partha Sarthy
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CIVIL REVIEW No.37 of 2025
In
Letters Patent Appeal No.1418 of 2023
======================================================
1. The Bihar Industrial Area Development Authority, Udyog Bhawan, East
Gandhi Maidan, Patna through its Managing Director.
2. The Managing Director, Bihar Industrial Area Development Authority,
Udyog Bhawan, East Gandhi Maidan, Patna.
3. The Joint Managing Director, Bihar Industrial Area Development Authority,
Udyog Bhawan, East Gandhi Maidan, Patna.
4. General Manager, Bihar Industrial Area Development Authority, Udyog
Bhawan, East Gandhi Maidan, Patna.
5. The Deputy General Manager, Darbhanga Cluster.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. I.G. Foods and Beverage Pvt. Ltd., through its Director Amresh Kumar
Mishra (male), aged about 44 years, S/o Late Kulanand Mishra, R/o Sohray,
Lakshmipur, P.S.- Sakri, P.O.-Pandaul, District- Madhubani (Plot No.-13
Pandaul Industrial Area, P.S.- Pandaul, District- Madhubani).
2. The State of Bihar, through the Secretary, Department of Industries,
Government of Bihar, New Secretariat, Bailey Road, Patna.
3. The Secretary, Department of Industries, Government of Bihar, New
Secretariat, Bailey Road, Patna.
4. The Additional Chief Secretary, Department of Industries, Government of
Bihar, New Secretariat, Bailey Road, Patna.
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Lalit Kishore, Sr. Advocate
Mr. Sanchay Srivastava, Advocate
Mr. Sushant Srivastava, Advocate
Mr. Kanishka Shankar, Advocate
Mr. Ashish Kumar Palit, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Alok Ranjan, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Amish Kumar, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY
ORAL JUDGMENT
(Per: HONOURABLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE)
Date : 29-04-2025
Heard Mr. Lalit Kishore, learned Senior Advocate
Patna High Court C. REV. No.37 of 2025 dt.29-04-2025
for the petitioner/Bihar Industrial Area Development
Authority, Mr. Alok Ranjan, learned counsel for the
Opposite Party No.1/writ petitioner and Mr. Amish
Kumar, learned Advocate for the State.
2. A review of the judgment dated 08.01.2025
passed by a Bench of this Court in L.P.A. No. 1418 of
2023 arising out of C.W.J.C. No. 8521 of 2023 has been
sought for by the Bihar Industrial Area Development
Authority ('BIADA' in short).
3. By the aforenoted judgment, the decision of
the Managing Director was questioned on the ground of
he not having the authority to cancel the allotment in
favour of the writ petitioner, as such power was vested
only in the authority which comprise the Chairman;
Managing Director and other Officials of the Authority.
4. It appears that the judgment was delivered on
the basis of the ratio of Deepak Paints (P) Ltd. & Ors.
vs. The State of Bihar & Ors. [2008 (2) PLJR 293]
wherein it was held that the order of cancellation of
Patna High Court C. REV. No.37 of 2025 dt.29-04-2025
allotment by the Managing Director of the Authority
would be null and void as that power is vested in the
Authority, which is a body comprising the Chairman,
Managing Director and other Officials.
5. This aforenoted decision in Deepak Paints
(supra) was based on a plain reading of Section 6 of the
BIADA Act, 1974 (the 'Act of 1974' in short) as it then
stood wherein, sub-Section (2) of Section 6 clearly
provided that the Authority shall be responsible for
planning, development and maintenance of the industrial
area and amenities thereto and allotment of the land or
factory shed or building or parts of buildings, execution of
lease, modification and cancellation of such allotment of
lease, realization of fees, rent charges and matters
connected thereto. (emphasis supplied)
6. It has been submitted on behalf of the BIADA
that later, by the Amendment Act of 2017, the Act of
1974 underwent a change and sub-Section (4a) was
added to Section 3 of Chapter 2 which provided that the
Patna High Court C. REV. No.37 of 2025 dt.29-04-2025
Authority may, by general or special order in writing,
delegate to any officer of the Authority subject to such
condition, if any, as may be specified in the order, such of
its powers and functions under the Act as it may be deem
necessary.
7. The question whether the provisions of sub-
Section (4a) inserted by the Amendment Act of 2017,
controls the provisions contained in Section 6 of the Act
of 1974.
8. Section 6 of the Act of 1974 falls in Chapter 3
of the Act of 1974, providing for the general duties and
powers of the Authority. The intendment of the provisions
contained in Section 6 of the Act of 1974 is clear that any
order with respect to the cancellation of allotment of lease
amongst other functions and duties of the Authority shall
be passed by the Authority only.
9. The amendment by insertion of such Section
(4a) in Section 3 also refers to the powers of the
Authority to delegate, by a general or special order, its
Patna High Court C. REV. No.37 of 2025 dt.29-04-2025
power to any officer of the Authority subject to the terms
and conditions which the Authority deems appropriate, to
carry out or pass orders concerning such of the powers
and functions of the Authority under the Act.
10. Mr. Kishore, therefore, has submitted that
sub-Section (4a), in such circumstances, cannot be read
ejusdem generis with Section 3(4) which specifies the
functions which can be carried out or discharged by the
Managing Director alone, who is the Chief Executive
Officer of the Authority. Those functions and duties
include (a) receiving all money on behalf of the Authority,
issuing receipt and maintaining proper account for the
same; (b) drawing money from the fund of the Authority
for disbursement of salaries, allowances and meeting of
the expenses of the Authority; (c) to authenticate any
order of the Authority and; (d) to perform any order only
that may be assigned to him by the Authority or the State
Government from time to time. Sub-clause (d) of Section
3(4) clearly specifies that a Managing Director could also
Patna High Court C. REV. No.37 of 2025 dt.29-04-2025
perform any other duty which is assigned to him by the
Authority or the State Government.
11. Such delegation by the authority could be on
Managing Director or any other officer of the authority but
subject the terms and conditions which the authority may
fix.
12. The controlling provision in Section 3 (4),
namely, that the Managing Director shall perform,
amongst others duties specified under (a), (b), (c) and (d)
are only illustrative and the power would include beyond
such duties specified which will include the cancellation of
the lease. There is no caveat in the section to limit the
operation of the section only to the powers and duties
enumerated under (a), (b), (c) and (d).
13. On this logic and reason, Mr. Kishore
has argued that sub-Section 4(a) of Section 3 inserted by
the Amendment Act of 2017 permits the authority to
delegate its duties, powers and functions to Managing
Director or any other officer including Joint Managing
Patna High Court C. REV. No.37 of 2025 dt.29-04-2025
Director and such delegation would not be limited to the
duties listed under (a), (b), (c) and (d) but the duties and
powers provided in Section 6 of the Act of 1974 falling in
Chapter -3. This would include the power to cancel the
lease.
14. We find force in the submission of Mr.
Kishore.
15. The judgment, therefore, stands modified to
the extent that the Managing Director/Joint Managing
Director could pass an order as the delegatee of the
Authority, pertaining to cancellation of lease deed,
provided he is authorized by the Authority by a general or
special order and that there would be no application of the
ratio of the judgment in Deepak Paints (P) Ltd.
(supra) as at that time, the Act of 1974 had not been
amended [when the judgment in Deepak Paints (P) Ltd.
(supra) was delivered].
16. After having said that, we further clarify
that the authority or its delegatee, namely, Managing
Patna High Court C. REV. No.37 of 2025 dt.29-04-2025
Director or Joint Managing Director would be entitled to
consider the issue of cancellation of plot only after
affording an opportunity to the respondent, who shall file
an objection, if already not filed, and the issue shall be
considered on the basis of inspection reports as also the
objection. The authority or its delegatee may conduct a
further inspection if necessary and also consider the
request of the respondent to allow and permit some time
for it to establish the industry. The order so passed would
be a speaking order.
17. The review petition stands dispose off.
(Ashutosh Kumar, ACJ)
Avinash/Sunil (Partha Sarthy, J)
AFR/NAFR
CAV DATE N/A
Uploading Date 03.05.2025
Transmission Date
