IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
MAHESH CHANDRA TRIPATHI, PRASHANT KUMAR, JJ.
M/S Three C Green Developers Pvt. Ltd. And 8 Others - Appellant
Versus
State Of U.P. And 2 Others - Respondents
Writ C No. - 31823 of 2019
Decided on : 24-02-2025
(A) Sports City Scheme 2010-2011 - Development of sports facilities in Noida - Allegations of fraud and collusion between builders and Noida Authority officials leading to significant financial losses - The scheme aimed to develop state-of-the-art sports facilities but was frustrated by violations of terms and conditions by allottees and negligence by officials. (Paras 68-70, 110-112)
(B) Corporate Veil - The court emphasized the need to pierce the corporate veil to identify individuals responsible for the fraud and to hold them accountable. (Paras 119-121)
(C) Judicial Interference - The court asserted its authority to intervene in administrative decisions when public interest is at stake, especially in cases of corruption and fraud. (Paras 124-126)
(D) CBI Inquiry - The court directed a CBI investigation into the scam involving the Noida Authority and builders due to the gravity of the allegations. (Paras 130-134) (E) Corporate Insolvency - The court noted that the insolvency process initiated by the petitioner appeared to be a strategy to evade responsibilities and liabilities. (Paras 141-143) (F) Recommendations - The court provided guidelines for handling insolvency within a consortium context to prevent solvent companies from being adversely affected. (Paras 150-151) (G) Directions - The court ordered the CBI to investigate the matter and refused to grant relief to the petitioners. (Paras 152)
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. development of sports city (Para 2) |
JUDGMENT :
TABLE OF CONTENTS
| S.No. | Heading | Page No. |
| A. | Factual Matrix & History of the development of the Sports City | 02-03 |
| B. | Sports City Scheme 2010-2011 | 03-06 |
| C. | Land Use of Sports City | 06-16 |
| D. | Arguments on behalf of the petitioners | 16-18 |
| E. | Arguments on behalf of the Noida Authority | 18-35 |
| F. | Analysis | 35 |
| G. | Effect of Past Conduct | 35-36 |
| H. | Scheme- 2010-2011 for development of Sport City in Noida and its violation | 36-44 |
| I. | Insolvency Lifting of Corporation Veil | 44-50 |
| J. | Zero Period | 50-51 |
| K. | Scam | 51-53 |
| L. | Fraud | 53-55 |
| M. | Piercing of Administrative Veil | 55-57 |
| N. | Scope of Judicial Interference | 57-59 |
| O. | CBI Inquiry | 59-63 |
| P. | Corporate Insolvency | 63-65 |
| Q | Effect on consortium when a member of the consortium goes into the insolvency | 65 |
| R. | Recommendations | 66 |
| S. | Directions | 67 |
1. Heard Sri Sanjeev Kumar Rai, learned counsel for the petitioners; Sri Mohan Srivastava, learned Standing Counsel for the State- respondents and Shri Manish Goyal, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri Kaushalendra Nath Singh and Ms. Anjali Gokhlani, learned counsel for respondent-NOIDA.
A. FACTUAL MATRIX AND HISTORY OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE SPORTS CITY
2. The Board of Noida Authority took a decision on 16.8.2004, to develop sports facilities of international standards in Noida. In the meeting held on 25.6.2007 the Board came to a conclusion that there are no sports facilities available in Noida, hence, an area of 311.60 hectares was marked for development of the sports city. In the next Board meeting held on 8.4.2008, it was resolved, keeping in mind of the upcoming Commonwealth Games in 2010, that the land use of sector 76, 78, 79, 101, 102, 104 and 107 be changed for the development of the sports city. However, the area earmarked to develop sports city was increased to 346 hectares. Accordingly, Grant Thorton was appointed to formulate the scheme and also formulate conditions for the allotment of the land. In the next Board meetings held on 18.9.2008, the amended Masterplan - 2031 of Noida was considered. It was for the first time that the details as to what was expected in the sports city were mentioned. Clause 5.9.3 of the master plan laid down the details of the sports city. On 1.10.2008, and 4.11.2008, the brochure for the sports city was finalised and the process for the change of the land use was initiated. The scheme seems to have been launched and was extended upto 12.1.2009, but was not finalised. Thereafter, in September 2010, the area of the Sports City was changed from 311 hectares to 150 hectares. Grant Thornton was asked to give a fresh detailed project report and thereafter the reserved price was fixed. From 2010-11 to 2015-16, four sports city projects were launched on a total area of 798 acres, in which 3 golf courses, one cricket stadium of international standards, and other sports facilities of international standards were planned. This case pertains to one of those four projects where no development on the sports facility has taken place but the allottees/ builders have already monetized the part of the project that was meant for recovery of cost incurred to build the sports facilities.
B. SPORTS CITY SCHEME 2010-2011
3. As per the formulated scheme, New Okhla Industrial Development Authority[NOIDA]sometime in the year 2011 launched the project of “Sports City” which was to be developed in Sectors 78, 79 and 150 of NOIDA. The scheme was launched on 03.03.2011 and closed on 24.03.2011. As per the scheme, a Sports City was to be developed on a land parcel of 72.75 hectare (7,27,500 sqm) in Sector 78 and 79 and another sports city in Sector 150.
4. The reserve price for the scheme was set at Rs.11,500/- per square metre. The developer was supposed to create sports facilities over 70% of the entire land area, which was not marketable, and to set off this expense in developing the sports city, the developer was allowed to construct group housing on 28% and commercial on 2% of the total land with FAR of 1.5. The scheme clearly stated that the population d
State of U.P. and others v. Renusagar Power Company and others
Delhi Development Authority v. Skipper Construction Company and another
Shubhra Mukherjee v. Bharat Coking Coal Ltd.
State of Rajasthan v. Gotan Limestone Khanij Udyog Pvt. Ltd.
The court emphasized the need to pierce the corporate veil to hold individuals accountable for fraud, asserting judicial authority to intervene in administrative decisions when public interest is com....
The court emphasized the need for accountability in public contracts, allowing judicial review to ensure fairness and public interest, while directing a CBI inquiry into irregularities in the Sports ....
The court emphasized that reverse CIRP cannot be used to evade liabilities, and the interests of homebuyers must be prioritized in insolvency proceedings.
The court emphasized that insolvency proceedings should not be exploited to evade liabilities, confirming the necessity to protect homebuyers' interests and investigate corporate fraud.
A lead member of a consortium who opts out lacks locus standi to challenge the actions of the authority regarding project delays and cannot claim damages.
Resolution Plan – Inertia on part of GNIDA and its failure to protect interests of home/office space buyers, apart from its own interests, clearly disentitles it from levying penal interest/penal cha....
The High Court emphasized the importance of independent and effective investigation in cases involving allegations of corruption and irregularities, particularly when high-ranking officials and burea....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.