Eighteen Years On, The Cancellation Is Gone And So Is The Obstruction
An industrial plot allotment was cancelled in 2007. A Division Bench has found the cancellation arbitrary and mala fide, and has stopped the authority from touching the land.
The Court held the authority indulged in complete non-application of mind and acted with arbitrary and mala fide intent, only in order to create hindrance in the petitioners setting up their industrial unit. The Single Judge's order and the cancellation of allotment were both set aside, and the authority and its agents restrained from dispossessing the petitioners or giving any further effect to the cancellation letter.
- The purpose behind the cancellation was the finding — to create hindrance, not to enforce any condition.
- Both orders fell, the writ court's and the authority's.
- A positive restraint followed, not merely a quashing — no dispossession, no further effect.
- Eighteen years from the cancellation to this judgment.
- Court
- High Court at Calcutta
- Bench
- Justice HON'BLE JUSTICE SABYASACHI BHATTACHARYYA, Justice HON'BLE JUSTICE SANDIP KUMAR DE
- Citation
- FMA No. 318 of 2024
- Case
- FMA No. 318 of 2024
- Decided
- 10 September 2026
- Outcome
- Appeal allowed; cancellation of allotment set aside and dispossession restrained
What the authority did
The development authority cancelled the allotment of an industrial plot in December 2007, while the writ petitioners were seeking to proceed with construction and set up their industrial unit on it.
A Single Judge declined relief by a judgment of November 2023.
What the Division Bench found
It appears the authority indulged in complete non-application of mind to the problem, and acted with arbitrary and mala fide intent, only in order to create hindrance in the setting up of the industrial unit by the writ petitioners.
The Single Judge's finding was therefore also not sustainable, and the judgment and order of November 2023 was set aside.
Consequently the cancellation of allotment of December 2007 was set aside as well.
The protection granted
The authority, and its men, agents and subordinates, shall not dispossess the writ petitioners from the plot in question.
Nor shall they give any effect or further effect to the letter of cancellation of allotment. The appeal was allowed on contest, without any order as to costs.
Who argued it
Appearances as recorded in the judgment of the Court.
Frequently asked
Can a development authority cancel an allotment at will?
No. Here the cancellation was found arbitrary, mala fide and made only to obstruct the unit being built, and was set aside.
Does quashing the cancellation protect possession?
It did here — the Court expressly restrained the authority from dispossessing the allottees.
Challenging a cancelled industrial allotment
- Build the timeline of the authority's conduct alongside the allottee's steps to construct; the pattern is the evidence of intent.
- Plead non-application of mind and mala fides as separate grounds, each with its own material.
- Ask for a restraint on dispossession, not just for the cancellation to be quashed.
- Where a Single Judge has upheld the cancellation, attack that finding directly in the appeal memo.
Source. High Court at Calcutta, FMA No. 318 of 2024, decided 10 September 2026 by Justice HON'BLE JUSTICE SABYASACHI BHATTACHARYYA, Justice HON'BLE JUSTICE SANDIP KUMAR DE. This explainer is written from the judgment text as reported.
Claw tracks High Court at Calcutta and 24 other High Courts, reads every order handed back, and surfaces the directions that carry a deadline. clawlaw.in