Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2019 Supreme(Raj) 1878

IN THE HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH
Mohammad Rafiq and Goverdhan Bardhar, JJ.
M/s Sun City Project Pvt Ltd, Through Its Director Varun Aggarwal - Appellant
Versus
Jaipur Development Authority, J L N Marg, Jaipur Through Its Secretary - Respondent
Special Appeal (Writ) No. 1484 of 2019; Civil Writ Petition No. 9362 of 2018
Decided On : 04-11-2019

Advocates Appeared:
R.K. Agarwal, Advocate, Sunita Pareek, Advocate, Adhiraj Modi, Advocate, Amit Kuri, Advocate, Saloni Khatri, Advocate

The liability of a landowner to pay conversion charges for changing the land use from industrial to commercial, as per the conditions imposed by the Land Use Change Committee and the Collector's order.

Headnote:
LAND USE CHANGE - RAJASTHAN INDUSTRIAL AREAS ALLOTMENT RULES, 1959 - SECTION 14 - RAJASTHAN MUNICIPALITIES (CHANGE OF LAND USE) RULES, 2000 - RULE 12(I)(K) AND 12(II)(J) - JAIPUR DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ACT, 1982 - SECTION 25 - SECTION 90B OF THE LAND REVENUE ACT, 1956 - The court interpreted various provisions of the Rajasthan Industrial Areas Allotment Rules, 1959, Rajasthan Municipalities (Change of Land Use) Rules, 2000, Jaipur Development Authority Act, 1982, and Section 90B of the Land Revenue Act, 1956, in the context of a dispute over land use change charges. The court held that the appellant was liable to pay conversion charges for changing the land use from industrial to commercial, as per the conditions imposed by the Land Use Change Committee and the Collector's order. However, the court directed the appellant to deposit only a sum of Rs.5 crores with the JDA as an interim measure, considering the facts and circumstances of the case.
Fact of the Case:

The appellant purchased land that was initially used for industrial purposes. The previous owner had obtained permission to change the land use to agricultural, subject to certain conditions, including the requirement to seek permission from the local body for any non-agricultural use. The appellant applied to the JDA for permission to change the land use to commercial, which was granted. The JDA later raised a demand for conversion charges, which the appellant challenged.
Finding of the Court:

The court held that the appellant was liable to pay conversion charges for changing the land use from industrial to commercial, as per the conditions imposed by the Land Use Change Committee and the Collector's order. However, the court directed the appellant to deposit only a sum of Rs.5 crores with the JDA as an interim measure, considering the facts and circumstances of the case.
Issues: 1. Whether the appellant was liable to pay conversion charges for changing the land use from industrial to commercial. 2. Whether the amount of conversion charges demanded by the JDA was justified.
Ratio Decidendi: The court interpreted the relevant provisions of the Rajasthan Industrial Areas Allotment Rules, 1959, Rajasthan Municipalities (Change of Land Use) Rules, 2000, Jaipur Development Authority Act, 1982, and Section 90B of the Land Revenue Act, 1956, and held that the appellant was liable to pay conversion charges for changing the land use from industrial to commercial, as per the conditions imposed by the Land Use Change Committee and the Collector's order. However, the court considered the facts and circumstances of the case, including the appellant's reliance on the Collector's order and the JDA's subsequent grant of permission for the land use change, and directed the appellant to deposit only a sum of Rs.5 crores with the JDA as an interim measure.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the appeal but directed that the writ petition be listed for hearing at the admission stage before the learned Single Judge on 20th January, 2020 with request to the learned Single Judge to decide it finally.

JUDGMENT

Mohammad Rafiq, J. - This appeal has been preferred by M/s. Suncity Project Pvt. Ltd. challenging the order dated 14.08.2019 passed by the learned Single Judge dated 14.08.2019 by which the application filed by the respondent-Jaipur Development Authority under Article 226(3) of the Constitution of India has been allowed in part, requiring the appellant to deposit a sum of Rs.5.00 crores with the JDA within a period of 60 days towards the demand of due charges for change of land use of the subject land to commercial. The learned Single Judge, however, directed that in the event the appellant-company succeeds in the writ petition, the respondent-JDA will be liable to refund the aforesaid amount or amount as the court may direct with interest at the current PLR rate of the State Bank of India commencing the date of deposit under the interim order till the date of re-payment.

2. The appellant in the writ petition challenged the judgement of the Jaipur Development Authority Appellate Tribunal (for short- 'the Tribunal') dated 13.4.2018 (Annexure-1) and the communication/demand notices dated 5.1.2016 (Annexure-2), dated 15.3.2016 (Annexure-3) and 22.9.2016 (Annexure-3A) and prayed that the demand raised by the respondents pursuant to audit objection be declared illegal and arbitrary.

3. The appellant approached the Tribunal by filing the appeal against the order dated 22.9.2016 (Annexure-3A) issued by the JDA demanding a sum of Rs.7,18,12,474 for conversion of the disputed land from industrial to commercial and another sum of Rs.10,86,16,367 towards interest, totalling to Rs.18,04,28,841. The Tribunal by the aforesaid judgement dated 13.4.2018 dismissed the appeal.

4. Facts of the case are that the appellant purchased the land in dispute measuring 7 Bigha 9 Biswa in khasra no.1/1, Village Bassi, Sitarampura, Tehsil, Sawai-Jaipur, Jhotwara Road, Jaipur vide sale deed dated 25.07.2005 from M/s.Assam Roller Flour Mills. The land was earlier being used for industrial purpose, but at the instance of erst while owner M/s. Assam Roller Four Mills, by order dated 22.6.2005 passed under Rule 14(1) of Rajasthan Industrial Areas Allotment Rules, 1959 by District Collector, the land use was changed from industrial to agricultural on certain conditions and accordingly ordered to be entered in the revenue records. Condition no.4 thereof stipulates that the land being situated in the Urban Area, the company in order to make use of the same for any non-agricultural purpose, will have to seek permission from the local body concerned after making appropriate application in accordance with Rules. Thereafter, the appellant-company has submitted application dated 1.9.2005 to the Commissioner, JDA, Jaipur for converting the land for commercial use. The JDA by notification dated 7.10.2005 issued u/s.25(3) of the JDA Act changed the land use in the Master Plan from industrial to commercial.

5. The case of the appellant was placed before the Land Use Change Committee, Jaipur Division on 3.1.2006, which allowed the land use change. However, condition no.4 thereof stipulated that the appellant for the purpose of change of land use from industrial to commercial shall be required to deposit the conversion charges for getting the lease deed issue. On application by the appellant filed under Section 90B of the Land Revenue Act, the prescribed authority passed an order (Annexure-8) dated 4.2.2006 for reverting the land to Jaipur Development Authority as per the original Section 54 of the JDA Act, 1982, by requiring the Tehsildar to accordingly mutate the land in its name, but simultaneously the lease deed was issued in favour of the appellant on 8.3.2006. It appears that the audit objection was raised by the Audit Department for not charging the correct amount of conversion charges from the appellant. The Deputy Commissioner, Zone-6 submitted reply to the audit objection on 16.4.2008.

6. Shri R.K. Agarwal, learned senior counsel for the appellant has argued tha

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

Judicial Analysis