2026:JHHC:10175 --1-- W.P. (C.) No. 3054 of 2008 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI W.P. (C.) No. 3054 of 2008 ---- KABSONS Industries Limited, having registered office at House No.8-3-1087, Plot No.48, Srinagar Colony, Hyderabad, A.P. – 500073 through its Executive Director, Mr. Rajiv Kabra, son of Gopi Kishan Kabra, resident of 7-1-59/10, Dharam Karan Road, PS – Ameerpet, Hyderabad, District – Hyderabad .... Petitioner -- Versus -- 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. The Secretary, Department of Industries, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi 3. Ranchi Industrial Area Development Authority, RIADA Bhawan, Main Road, Ranchi 4. Managing Director, Ranchi Industrial Area Development Authority, RIADA Bhawan, Main Road, Ranchi 5. Secretary Ranchi Industrial Area Development Authority, RIADA Bhawan, Main Road, Ranchi 6. Development Officer, Ranchi Industrial Area Development Authority, RIADA Bhawan, Main Road, Ranchi .... Respondents ---- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI --- For the Petitioner :- Mr. Ram Nivas Roy, Advocate For the State :- Ms. Priyasha Priyadarshi,Advocate For Respondent No.3 to 6 :- Mr. C.A. Bardhan, Advocate ---- 17/09.04.2026 Heard Mr. Ram Nivas Roy, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Ms. Priyasha Priyadarshi, learned counsel appearing for the State and Mr. C.A. Bardhan, learned counsel appearing for the respondent Nos.3 to 6. 2026:JHHC:10175 --2-- W.P. (C.) No. 3054 of 2008 2. This petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for quashing of the letter No.2296 dated 29.11.2003 whereby the plot allotted to the petitioner in the industrial area has been cancelled by RIADA now JIADA (Jharkhand Industrial Area Development Authority), Ranchi region. Prayer is also made for quashing of letter No.646 dated 22.05.2007 whereby the petitioner has been directed to vacate the allotted plot. 3. Mr. Ram Nivas Roy, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that bottling plant of LPG was already started in the said plot, however, the authority on the wrong presumption has assumed that the bottling plant was not started and they have cancelled the allotment. He further submits that till date they are accepting the rent of the said land from the petitioner. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the JIADA submits that for 30 years the land in question was allotted to the petitioner with condition that he will commence the production within six months from the date of agreement, however, it has been found later on that the plant has not been installed and operation was not started and in view of that the said allotment of the petitioner has already been cancelled. He further submits that the lease was for 30 years only and the lease period has already been expired on 27.02.2024. 5. In the counter affidavit, Annexure-N is a document whereby the JIADA has given the liberty to the petitioner to the effect that 2026:JHHC:10175 --3-- W.P. (C.) No. 3054 of 2008 the petitioner is still willing to take the said land on lease the petitioner may approach the authority by way of filing fresh application. 6. In view of the above facts, Mr. Ram Nivas Roy, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner on instruction seeks permission to withdraw this petition with liberty to move before the authority for settlement of issue and for further lease. 7. Accordingly, this petition is permitted to be withdrawn and disposed of with the aforesaid liberty. 8. If the petitioner approaches the authority, the authority will take decision expeditiously. (Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) Dated 09.04.2026 Sangam/