SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2022 Supreme(Bom) 1023

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
R. D. Dhanuka, Kamal Khata, JJ.
Anwar Hussain J. Thim - Appellant
Vs.
State of Maharashtra, & Ors. - Respondent
Writ Petition No. 6507 Of 2017
Decided On : 23-09-2022

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Mr.Girish S.Godbole, i/b. Ms.Shrushti Tulpule
For the Respondent: Mr.A.I.Patel, Additional G.P. a/w. Mr.A.A.Alaspurkar, A.G.P., Mr.Murlidhar L. Patil

The impugned notification did not apply to the entire area mentioned in the sanctioned layout, and subsequent applications for further development were governed by the provisions at the time of application.

Headnote:

MRTP Act - Development Control Regulations - Notification dated 8th November, 2013 - The court considered whether the impugned notification applied to the entire layout sanctioned by the Municipal Corporation prior to 8th November, 2013, and whether it applied to the application made for revised commencement certificate or for further development. The court found that the commencement certificate was only for a part of the entire plot, and subsequent applications for further development were governed by the provisions at the time of application. The court dismissed the writ petition, ruling that the impugned notification did not apply to the entire area mentioned in the sanctioned layout.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioners sought a declaration that a notification was not applicable to them and a writ of certiorari for quashing and setting aside a clause of the impugned notification. The petitioners had entered into a development agreement for a property and obtained various certificates and clearances for construction. The State of Maharashtra issued a notification incorporating Regulations for Inclusive Housing in the Development Control Regulations of Municipal Corporations. The petitioners applied for renewal of or revised commencement certificate for the layout.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the impugned notification did not apply to the entire area mentioned in the sanctioned layout and subsequent applications for further development were governed by the provisions at the time of application. The court dismissed the writ petition.

Issues: The issues included whether the impugned notification applied to the entire layout sanctioned by the Municipal Corporation prior to 8th November, 2013, and whether it applied to the application made for revised commencement certificate or for further development.

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the commencement certificate was only for a part of the entire plot, and subsequent applications for further development were governed by the provisions at the time of application. The impugned notification did not apply to the entire area mentioned in the sanctioned layout.

Final Decision: The court dismissed the writ petition, ruling that the impugned notification did not apply to the entire area mentioned in the sanctioned layout.

JUDGMENT :

R.D.Dhanuka, J.

Rule. Mr.Patel, learned Additional Government Pleader waives service for respondent nos. 1 and 2. Mr.M.L.Patil, learned counsel for the respondent no.3 waives service. Rule is made returnable forthwith.

2. By this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have prayed for a declaration that the notification no. TPB 4312/CR-45/2012(I)/UD-11 dated 8th November, 2013 is not applicable to the petitioners.

3. The petitioners have also prayed for a writ of certiorari for quashing and setting aside Clause No.3 of the impugned notification dated 8th February, 2016 to the extent that it leads to a modification in Development Control Regulations. Some of the relevant facts for the purpose of deciding this petition are as under :-

4. On 23rd July, 2007, the State of Maharashtra declared its housing policy in order to facilitate affordable housing in urban and rural areas and create an adequate housing for Lower Income Group (LIG) and Economically Weaker Section (EWS) on ownership basis or rental basis vide resolution dated 17th July, 2008 and directed the Municipal Corporations to modify their sanctioned Development Control Regulations to include new regulations for the purpose of inclusive housing.

5. On 22nd December, 2007, the petitioners entered into a Development Agreement in joint venture in respect of the said property for Survey No. 1/1 + 1/2 + 1/4. The said Development Agreement was registered in the office of the Joint Sub-Registrar, Nashik – 5 on 28th March, 2008. On 24th December, 2009, the petitioners entered into a Development Agreement in joint venture with the owners of the said property for Survey No. 1/3 + 1/5 which was duly registered on 1st November, 2010 with the Deed of Confirmation.

6. On 27th April, 2012, the petitioner no.2 applied to the Chief Fire Officer, Nashik Municipal Corporation for obtaining the Fire N.O.C. for entire project/layout with building height of P + 12 floors (39.0 mtrs.) and the provisional Fire N.O.C. for the 39 meters. On 27th April, 2012 the Chief Fire Officer, Nashik granted the provisional fire N.O.C. for the entire project/layout. On 5th June, 2012, the respondent no.3 granted sanction for the building construction plans and Commencement Certificate to the petitioner in respect of Survey No. 1/1 + 1/2 + 1/3 + 1/4 and 1/5 of Village Pathardi Shivar. This Commencement Certificate was provided for 4 buildings with Stilt + 4 floors and 16 buildings with stilt + 1 floor, having a total built up area of 19,820.78 sq.mtrs.

7. It is the case of the petitioners that the Commencement Certificate was asked for entire land on 3rd October, 2011 and was granted for the entire layout for the purpose of residential development project. The land development charges required to be paid under section 124 of the MRTP Act were deposited by the petitioners for the entire land. The Condition No.3 of the Commencement Certificate provided that ‘the commencement certificate for building permit shall remain valid for a period of one year commencing from date of its issue and thereafter it shall become invalid automatically’. On 8th November, 2013, the State of Maharashtra issued a notification incorporating Regulations for Inclusive Housing in the Development Control Regulations of Municipal Corporations having a population of 1 million or above, in exercise of powers under section 37(1AA)(c) of the MRTP Act, 1996.

8. It is the case of the petitioners that clause 4 of the said notification clearly provided that the said provisions shall be applicable prospectively and shall not be applicable to any housing scheme or residential development project wherein Commencement Certificate had been issued prior to the date of coming into force of these provisions and was valid on such date. On 13th May, 2013, the Executive Engineer of the Nashik Municipal Corporation issued a Part Plinth Completion Certificate to the petitioner no.2.

9. On 11th July, 2014, the petitioner

    Click Here to Read the rest of this document
    1
    2
    3
    4
    5
    6
    7
    8
    9
    10
    11
    SupremeToday Portrait Ad
    supreme today icon
    logo-black

    An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

    Please visit our Training & Support
    Center or Contact Us for assistance

    qr

    Scan Me!

    India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

    For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

    whatsapp-icon Back to top