1 2025:CGHC:34365-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WA No. 419 of 2025 Topworth Steels And Power Pvt. Ltd. Avani Signature, 6th Floor, 91 A/1, Park Street, Kolkata, West Bengal - 700016. ... Appellant versus Chhattisgarh State Industrial Development Corporation, Udyog Bhawan, Ring Road No.-1, Telibandha, Raipur, Chhattisgarh - 492006 ... Respondent(s) (Cause title taken from CIS) For Appellant : Mr. Rakesh Dwivedi, Senior Advocate appeared through video conferencing alongwith Mr. Aman Saxena, Advocate. For Respondent : Mr. Prafulla Bharat, Senior Advocate alongwith Mr. Trivikram Nayak, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru, Judge Order on Board Per Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice 21.07.2025 SOURABH BHILWAR Digitally signed by SOURABH BHILWAR Date: 2025.07.22 09:57:39 +0530 2 1. Heard Mr. Rakesh Dwivedi, learned Senior Advocate appeared through video conferencing alongwith Mr. Aman Saxena, learned counsel for the appellant. Also heard Mr. Prafulla N Bharat, learned Senior Advocate alongwith Mr. Trivikram Nayak, learned counsel for the respondent. 2. The instant appeal has been filed by the appellant seeking for the following reliefs:- “23.1 The Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to set aside the Impugned Order dated 02.05.2025 passed by learned Single Judge in W.P.(C) No. 2176 of 2025; 23.2 The Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to stay the operations of the letters dated 01.05.2024, 26.11.2024 and 17.03.2025 issued by the Respondent; 23.3 The Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to direct the Respondent to issue the No Objection Certificate in favour of the Appellant for the creation of a mortgage over the industrial plot admeasuring 23.664 hectares situated at Rasmada, District Durg, Chhattisgarh without imposing any additional conditions. 23.4 Any other relief with this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper be awarded in favour of the Appellant, including cost.” 3. (i) Being aggrieved by the order dated 02/05/2025 passed by the learned Single Judge in WPC No. 2176/2025 whereby the interim application filed by the writ petitioner has been rejected and the matter was directed to be listed after six weeks for further hearing, the appellant preferred the present appeal contending that the 3 present writ appeal is maintainable against the order dated 02.05.2025 since the said order vitally affects the rights of the parties. The determination of the issue, as to whether pursuant to the insolvency resolution process initiated against the Appellant there has been a merger/amalgamation of the Appellant into a Successful Resolution Applicant, has a conclusive bearing on the final adjudication of the case and therefore, the bar contained in proviso to Section 2 (1) of Chattisgarh High Court (Appeal to Division Bench) Act, 2006 is inapplicable in the present case. (ii) Learned counsel further submits that in the writ petition, the Appellant/ writ petitioner had challenged the letters issued by the Respondent demanding the payment of Rs. 6,69,95,592/- as transfer charges, which was set as a pre-condition for grant of NoC by the Respondent. The demand was premised on Clause 3.4.1.3 (B) and 3.4.2.11 of Chhattisgarh Audhyogik Bhoomi Avam Bhawan Prabandhan Niyam, 2015. The Respondent has issued the letters on an erroneous premise that upon approval of the Resolution Plan submitted by the successful resolution application (SRA), there has been a 'transfer' as understood under the Companies Act and any merger/amalgamation is to be construed as transfer under the said Rules. Learned counsel submits that the finding of the Learned Single Judge by placing reliance on Clause 9.3 of the Resolution Plan that the Appellant has undergone a merger is erroneous and contrary to the record. The learned Single Judge has completely ignored the facts and 4 rejected the Interim application filed by the writ petitioner. Hence this appeal. 4. Learned counsel for the respondent would oppose the submission made by the counsel for the appellant and submits that the present writ appeal is not maintainable and the writ petition may be listed before the appropriate Bench as per the roster. 5. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents. 6. Perusal of the orders passed by the writ Court goes to show that the matter has not been listed after 02/05/2025, though while rejecting the interim application, the learned Single Judge has directed for listing of the case after six weeks. 7. In view of the above, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the writ appeal is disposed of with a direction to the Registry of this Court to list the writ petition bearing WPC No. 2176/2025 before the learned Single Judge as per the roster on 05/08/2025. 8. Accordingly, the present writ appeal is disposed of. Sd/- Sd/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice S. Bhilwar/ Jyoti