Back
ALOK MATHUR
Kapil Misra – Appellant
Versus
State of U. P. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
ALOK MATHUR, J.
1. Heard Sri Jaideep Narain Mathur, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Sunil Kumar Chaudhary, Sri Abhishek Khare and Ms. Aishvarya Mathur, Advocate for the petitioners as well as learned Standing Counsel for the State respondents and Sri Sanjeev Sen, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Waseequddin Ahmed, learned counsel appearing for New Okhla Industrial Development Authority (hereinafter referred to as “NOIDA”).
2. The petitioner has challenged the correctness of the order dated 11/09/2023 passed by the Chief Executive Officer, “NOIDA” whereby he has declined to sanction the map submitted by the petitioner for group housing, as well as the order dated 10/04/2024 passed by the State Government in exercise of power under section 41 (3) of the U.P. Urban Planning and Development Act, 1973 wherein the validity of the order dated 11/09/2023 has been upheld and the revision of the petitioner has been dismissed.
3. The brief facts involved in the present controversy are that the petitioners were joint owners of land measuring 10,870 sq. mtrs situated at khata No. 7 khasra No. 2, Village Rohillapur, sector 132, NOIDA, District Gautam Buddha Nagar. The said
The deed of exchange is a valid ownership document for sanctioning a building map, and rejection based on the absence of a lease deed is arbitrary and illegal.
Regulatory authorities cannot arbitrarily deny building permits without valid statutory reasons, especially when ownership rights are undisputed.
Regulatory powers of NOIDA cannot arbitrarily deny building permits; valid ownership rights must be respected and decisions must be backed by statutory reasons.
Accrued rights from previous land use approvals must be respected despite new regulations; Town Planner's jurisdiction to deny building plan approval was not established.
Concealment of non-material facts does not justify cancellation of building plan sanction; the petitioner’s title to the land was upheld.
Public landowner has preferential redevelopment rights on reserved slum land; conditional NOC cancellation valid for developer's failure to provide compliant plans for public amenities, subordinating....
Prior development permissions granted under repealed rules remain valid despite subsequent regulatory changes, and cannot be revoked retroactively by new laws.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the resolution of the Municipal Corporation to allot the land was illegal and without authority of law, leading to the cancellation of the lea....
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
