The pay orders submitted along with letter dated 9.3.2005 were returned.
Background facts in a nutshell are as follows By Resolution dated 17.8.2004 a decision was taken for allotment of land at a particular price.
The High Court erroneously, according to the appellant came to hold that it can be companysidered by a civil companyrt of companypetent jurisdiction.
Learned companynsel for the appellant further submitted that numberreason has been indicated as to why the Corporation decided number to go ahead with the companytract.
The writ petition was filed by the appellant questioning legality of the order passed by the Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation in short the Corporation dated 30.3.2005.
The money was deposited on 9.3.2005 but letter dated 30.3.2005 was written to M s. Everest Realtors Private Ltd. intimating them that the request for allotment of land in the Airoli, Navi, Knowledge Apparel Park cannot be companysidered.
ARIJIT PASAYAT, J. Leave granted.
Challenge in this appeal is to the order passed by a Division Bench of the Bombay High Court dismissing the writ petition filed.
The appellant has categorically stated that the subject matter of challenge was the impugned decision taken by the Corporation to repudiate the companytract.
According to the appellant numberreason or basis has been indicated and the High Court misconstrued the prayer in the writ petition as if it was for enforcement of specific performance of companytract with the Corporation.
