JUDGMENT :

By the Court.-Sri Nikhil Agarwal, learned counsel for the petitioner, Smt. Anjali Upadhyay, learned counsel for the Respondent No. 2, 3 and 4 and learned Standing Counsel for the State respondents.

2. The writ petitioner which is a Company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956, engaged in the business of real estate and development of integrated township, construction and sale of flats etc. is aggrieved by the order dated 23.12.2019 passed by the Additional Chief Executive Officer, Greater Noida Industrial Development Authority, whereby and whereunder the claim of the petitioner for grant of the zero period benefit from the date of allotment dated 25.4.2011 till the date of passing of revised layout plan in respect of FH-02, Agricultural Green, Grater Noida is passed by the Respondent Authority has been rejected. Several other prayers have been made in the writ petition.

3. It is contended on behalf of the petitioner that the Greater Noida floated a scheme on 11.1.2011 for allotment of large group housing/builders residential plots in which the minimum reserve price of Rs. 2600/- per sq. meter was fixed. The bid of the petitioner was accepted @ Rs. 2785/- per sq. meter and land ad-measuring 404879 sq. meter was allotted in favour of the petitioner vide allotment letter dated 25.4.2011. A lease-deed was executed on 3.11.2012 for a consideration of Rs. 112,73,68,000/- payable in 12 installments as per the schedule mentioned in the lease-deed. The petitioner was handed over possession of 4,01,710.41 sq. meters of the land out of 4,04,879 sq. meters and balance land of 3168501 sq. meters was to be handed over later. On getting the possession of the land the petitioner submitted a layout plan which was duly approved by the Competent Authority. The plot allotted to the petitioner was not free from encroachment and was hampering the development work in as much as the land was still occupied by the villagers, there was a public road in the middle of the plot which was still being used by villagers. The petitioner submitted a revised lease plan and also requested the authority for declaration of zero period form the date of allotment i.e. 25.4.2011 to the date of approval of the revised lease plan and adjust the amount paid by the petitioner till that date against the outstanding principal amount and issue a new payment plan for future installments to be paid by the petitioner. It is further contended that the petitioner requested for issuance of revised lease plan. The Development Authority executed two supplementary lease-deeds on 4.12.2015 and 13.1.2017 whereafter the petitioner vide letter dated 23.1.2017 submitted building plans and other required documents for approval of revised sanction of the layout plan upon Plot No. FH-02 Sector Agricultural but no decision upon the revised layout plan submitted has been taken. On account of non-construction of approach road and non approval of revised layout plan submitted the petitioner could not carry out any development or construction actively upon the leased plot.

4. It is next contended that the Respondent Authority in its Board Meeting held on 24.12.2016 (107th Board Meeting) took a decision to grant zero period benefit to the allottees amongst other grounds on the ground that if the authority has delivered possession to the allottee and lease-deed was executed but the allottee is unable to access the plot as a result of which development is impossible to commence, the allottee is entitled to the benefit of zero benefit upto the date on which the alternate access is provided. The Authority did not extend the benefit of zero period to the petitioner even though it stood covered by it. The petitioner approached this Hon'ble Court my means of Writ (C) No. 21878 of 2018 which was disposed of vide order dated 21.6.2018 directing the authority to decide the representation of the petitioner in accordance with law and the policy decision taken in the 104th Board Meeting dated 14.