plot allotted without due procedure
Respected Sir, I am a partner of an unregistered partnership firm. We are 3 partners. I have been given Right of first refusal as Adjacent Plot Holder . I had submitted tender for the plot as an individual proprietor of adjacent plot. . My partnership firm has also submitted tender for the same plot. The filing person did not take authority letter for submitting tender from other Partners. Partnership tender bid came to be highest. Now as adjacent Plot holder having ROFR I claimed adjacent plot at the highest bided rate. MIDC CEO approved ROFR for me but Regional Officer turned down CEO Order and issued allotment letter to partnership firm. As a Partner I get 475 sqmtr and as individual adjacent plot holder by using ROFR I will get 750sqrmtrs of Plot. I have filed a WP in HC against the allotment order issued in favour of the Partnership firm by MIDC and not complying with CEO MIDC Order. Judge ordered to make other partners as respondents along with the partnership firms and MIDC Officials but said that as I am beneficiary in the partnership firm, No case can be made out for Interim Relief at this stage. Please advise regarding the points of argument and any other suggestions.
Since, the Hon’ble High Court has already upheld the order given by the Regional Officer thereby turning down the order of the MIDC CEO. What can now be done is that an appeal can be filed against the order of the Hon’ble High court which would lie before a higher bench of the same High Court. As a matter of fact, the aforesaid order of the Hon’ble High Court
In our opinion what is advisable is to file an appeal under the Letters Patent Act, 1865 which would lie before a similar bench of the same High Court but with different members, members other than the ones who have issued the previous order. It is called the Letters Patent Appeal, also known as “intra-court appeal”.
THE BOMBAY HIGH COURT (ORIGINAL SIDE) RULES [Updated as on 09th September, 2015] are applicable while filing an appeal in the Hon”ble High court with Maharashtra as the area of jurisdiction. The Rule 876 of the aforementioned rules talks about its Appellate jurisdiction.
Whereas for challenging the due process of law, you can file another Writ petition before the Hon’ble High Court but not on the same grounds contested earlier in the previous writ that has already been decided. It should be a new writ with fresh grounds claiming the ignorance of law by the authority of the Regional Officer at the time of overlooking the decision of the CEO of Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation.
Usually, an application for the stay on the status issued by the Regional Officer can be prayed for – in the court concerned. But since the order of the Hon’ble High Court states otherwise, no such application can lie for seeking a relief that is interim in nature.
Incase you are facing any difficulty pursuing the above advice or want any help in filing the case. Please follow the link below
 The Chief Justice may, from time to time, constitute a bench of not less than two Judges (in this and the next succeeding chapter referred to as “the Appellate Court”) to hear appeals and applications in appeals from decrees or orders passed by Judges exercising Original Jurisdiction of the High Court.
Book a phone consultation with a top-rated lawyer on Lawfarm.