Representation to be treated as statutory review for reconsideration of industrial plot allotment cancellation.

The petitioner was allotted Plot No. 72 in the Industrial Area Readymade Garment Park, Gwalior, on June 10, 2015, with a registered lease deed executed in August 2018

Despite obtaining building permission in 2022 and initiating foundation work, the petitioner failed to commence production within the prescribed period due to COVID-19 pandemic disruptions, financial constraints, and family hardships

Consequently, Respondent No. 3 issued a cancellation order on April 25, 2024

Although a first appeal was conditionally allowed, it was later nullified on July 29, 2025, leading to the respondents taking possession of the plot on September 8, 2025

The petitioner’s second appeal was dismissed by the Principal Secretary (Respondent No. 1) on February 17, 2026

The petitioner subsequently filed a representation dated April 27, 2026, which remained pending

1. Whether the respondents' cancellation of the plot allotment was arbitrary and disproportionate in light of the petitioner’s bona fide efforts and external hardships

2. Whether the pending representation of the petitioner could be treated as a statutory review application under the applicable industrial rules to provide administrative relief

The court primarily considered the principles of natural justice and equity under Article 226 and Article 14 of the Constitution of India regarding unreasonable and arbitrary state action

It specifically invoked Sections 43 and 46 of the Madhya Pradesh Audhyogik Bhumi Evam Bhawan Prabandhan Niyam, 2019, which provide a statutory remedy for the review of orders related to industrial land and building management

The Court did not delve into the merits of the cancellation but focused on the procedural equity of the petitioner’s grievances. The petitioner argued that the extreme penalty of cancellation was disproportionate given the presence of construction materials on-site and the unforeseen impact of the pandemic

Counsel for the petitioner narrowed the prayer to seek a time-bound direction for the disposal of the pending representation dated April 27, 2026

Considering that a statutory remedy of review exists under the 2019 Niyam, the Court found it appropriate to bridge the procedural gap by directing the executive authority to treat the existing representation as a formal review application

The respondents expressed no objection to this limited prayer

It directed Respondent No. 1 to treat the petitioner’s representation (Annexure P/8) as a review application under Sections 43 and 46 of the Madhya Pradesh Audhyogik Bhumi Evam Bhawan Prabandhan Niyam, 2019

The Respondent No. 1 is ordered to decide the said application by passing a reasoned and speaking order within two weeks from the receipt of the certified copy of the judgment