Punjab and Haryana HC seeks explanation from HSIIDC for auctioning already-allotted plot

Nov 30, 2025

Chandigarh [India], November 30 : The Punjab and Haryana High Court has issued notice to the Haryana State Industrial and Infrastructure Development Corporation (HSIIDC) on a writ petition filed by two petitioners, the highest bidders for an industrial plot in the Mega Food Park at IMT Rohtak.
The petitioners have alleged that despite winning the e-auction, they were denied allotment on the ground that the same plot had already been allotted to another party.
According to the petition, the duo deposited the earnest money (EMD) in June 2025 and participated in the e-auction held on July 16, 2025. Petitioners Neeti and Sonu claim to have emerged as the highest and successful bidders.
However, when they attempted to pay the balance amount, the payment link on the HSIIDC portal allegedly failed to open, despite repeated attempts.
The petitioners state that on August 26, 2025, they were "shocked and traumatized" to receive a communication from HSIIDC cancelling their bid on the ground that the plot had already been allotted elsewhere.
Advocate Sumit Gehlot, representing the petitioners, argued that HSIIDC acted arbitrarily by cancelling the bid of the highest bidders and failed to exercise basic due diligence before conducting the auction.
He submitted that the corporation's reliance on conditions in the E-Auction Rules and EMP-2015, particularly its power to accept or reject bids without assigning reasons, cannot justify such "high-handedness".
Gehlot further contended that the estate management practices of HSIIDC are "autocratic," and that the petitioners should not suffer because of the corporation's own lapses. He urged the court to direct HSIIDC to allot an alternative industrial plot of the same size, dimensions, price and location.
Taking note of these submissions, a Division Bench of Justice Anupinder Singh Grewal and Justice Deepak Manchanda issued notice to HSIIDC. Advocate Deepak Bhardwaj accepted notice on behalf of the corporation and sought time to take instructions and file a reply.

More News