Supreme Court Upholds BIADA's Right to Reclaim Land for IIT Patna Expansion Supreme Court restores Single Judge's decision, emphasizing public interest over individual rights in land allotment case.
In a landmark decision reinforcing the precedence of public interest over individual rights, the Supreme Court of India overturned a decision by a Division Bench of the Patna High Court, restoring the judgment of a Single Judge. The case involved the Bihar Industrial Area Development Authority (BIADA) and the State of Bihar reclaiming land allotted to M/s Scope Sales Pvt. Ltd. for the expansion of the Indian Institute of Technology (IIT) at Patna.
The Supreme Court bench, comprising Justices Dipankar Datta and Augustine George Masih, delivered the verdict on January 23, 2026, in favor of BIADA and the State of Bihar. The case revolved around a plot of land initially allotted to M/s Scope for commercial development, which BIADA subsequently reclaimed to facilitate the expansion of IIT Patna.
The decision to cancel the allotment was challenged by M/s Scope, leading to a judicial tug-of-war. Initially, a Single Judge at the Patna High Court dismissed M/s Scope's writ petition against the cancellation. However, a Division Bench later overturned this decision, ruling in favor of M/s Scope. This prompted BIADA and the State to appeal to the Supreme Court.
The apex court's ruling emphasized that the discretionary nature of writ jurisdiction allows courts to prioritize larger public interests over individual claims, particularly when national significance projects are involved. The court underscored the indispensability of land for the effective functioning and growth of premier educational institutions like IITs, which play a critical role in national development.
The Supreme Court's decision also touched upon the statutory powers under the Bihar Industrial Area Development Authority Act, 1974, affirming BIADA's authority to cancel allotments for public purposes under Section 6(2) of the Act. The court also noted that M/s Scope was offered an alternative plot, which it declined, and emphasized that adequate compensation is a necessary condition for such public interest-driven cancellations.
The court directed that the original sum paid by M/s Scope for the plot be refunded with interest, ensuring financial fairness while upholding the cancellation. The ruling also mandated that the land be exclusively used for educational purposes, thus aligning with the intended public benefit.
This judgment is a significant affirmation of the principle that individual rights, while important, must yield to collective societal benefits in scenarios involving projects of national importance.
Bottom Line:
Cancellation of allotment of land by a development authority for a larger public purpose, such as establishment of an educational institution, is valid and justified if done in good faith and for public interest, even if it involves deprivation of individual proprietary rights, provided adequate compensation is granted.
Statutory provision(s): Article 226 of the Constitution of India, Bihar Industrial Area Development Authority Act, 1974 Sections 6 and 9(3), Article 300A of the Constitution of India.
