Back
SURESHWAR THAKUR, KULDEEP TIWARI
Vishranti City Residents Welfare Society – Appellant
Versus
State of Punjab – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Mr. Sureshwar Thakur, J.
Since the issues involved in all the above writ petitions are similar, therefore, the same are taken up together for decision.
2. Vishranti City Residents Welfare Society (RAW), has knocked the door of this Court seeking the making of a mandamus, upon, the official respondents No.1 to 5 thus for providing electricity connection, to the society, in view of the order dated 28.4.2015 (Annexure P-3) passed by respondent No.3.
3. These petitions are pending since 2015 and various interlocutory orders were passed during the pendency of the instant petitions, which were also assailed before the Hon'ble Supreme Court, therefore, to give quietus to the instant issue, it is imperative for this Court to deal with the facts in detail.
4. In the present case, vide order dated 8.10.2012, the licence for development was granted to respondent No.6, by respondent No.3, rather for development of Vishranti City, in the Municipal Committee limits of Zirakpur, vis-a-vis, a total area of 24.50 acres. The licence was valid w.e.f. 8.10.2012 to 7.10.2015. Thereafter, the developer-respondent No.6 carved about 800 plots from the above licensed lands. The members of the petiti
The court mandated that the developer must complete outstanding works and provide electricity at domestic rates, emphasizing statutory obligations under the PAPRA Act.
Developers/colonizers are obligated to comply with the requirements of the Supply Code 2014, including bearing the cost of local distribution system and system loading charges, before handing over th....
The court established that the right to electricity is fundamental and cannot be denied based on ownership disputes or pending eviction proceedings.
Electricity cannot be denied based on ownership disputes; distribution licensees have a statutory duty to supply electricity upon valid application irrespective of ongoing eviction proceedings.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the authority to levy development charges must be in existence at the time of granting permission, and the recovery of the amount of premium o....
The CEO/SRA has the authority to terminate a Developer under Section 13(2) of the Slum Act for delays and non-performance in the Slum Rehabilitation Scheme, emphasizing timely completion for public b....
Development charges for nazul land must be assessed and determined at the time of granting permission, and any subsequent demand based on later government resolutions is not legally valid.
The court ruled that unilateral re-demands for fees post-license surrender constituted unjust enrichment and were not legally enforceable, affirming the integrity of contractual agreements.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
