Uttar Bhartiya Rajak Samaj Panchayat Banganga Rajak Samaj Co-Operative Housing Society (Proposed) & Anr. vs State of Maharashtra through Secretary & Ors.

Court

Supreme Court of India

Date

31 January 2020

Case No.

Civil Appeal Nos. 887-888 of 2020

Result

Dismissed

Bench

Mohan M. Shantanagoudar, R. Subhash Reddy

Citation

[2020] 2 S.C.R. 576 : 2020 INSC 122

Headnote

Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act:

s. 37(1) – Demand of premium @ 25% in respect of Slum Rehabilitation Scheme in terms of Notification dated 16.4.2008 – Propriety of – Letter of Intent (LOI) issued for Slum Rehabilitation Scheme on 5.1.2005, subject to clearance by Coastal Zone Management Authority (CRZ) – During pendency of proceedings before CRZ, Directives issued by Government on 16.4.2008 requiring to pay premium @ 25 % in respect of Slum Rehabilitation Scheme – Demand of premium pursuant to the Directives – challenged before High Court – High Court dismissed the petitions – Review petition also dismissed – Appeal to Supreme Court – Held: LOI was valid for a period of three months only and the same was not kept alive by the appellants, the premium is to be paid as per Government Resolution dated 16.4.2008 – Demand is in confirmity with law. Dismissing the appeals, the Court

HELD: The Letter of Intent was valid for a period of three months only. If, for any reason, delay occurred in obtaining clearance from the Coastal Zone Management Authority, nothing prevented the appellants to make appropriate representation so as to keep the Letter of Intent alive. When the validity of Letter of Intent itself is for three months and if the same is not kept alive, the premium is to be paid as per the Government Resolution dated 16.4.2008. By virtue of the aforesaid notification developer/co-operative society is required to pay premium @ 25% in terms of the Ready Reckoner, in respect of Slum Rehabilitation Schemes proposed to be undertaken on the lands owned by the Government, Semi-Government Undertakings and local bodies. In that view of the matter the demand made by the respondents is in conformity with the law and there is no illegality in the impugned orders passed by the High Court. [Paras 11 & 12][580C-E]

The Judgment of the Court was delivered by R. SUBHASH REDDY, J. 1. Leave granted. 2. These civil appeals are filed by the original petitioners in Writ Petition No.1902 of 2010 filed before the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, aggrieved by the order dated 03rd May 2012 dismissing the writ petition and further order dated 01st of July 2015 dismissing the review petition. 3. In the aforesaid writ petition filed before the High Court, the appellants have challenged an order of the High Power Committee (HPC) dated 19th December 2009 by which, the demand made by the 2nd respondent Slum Rehabi

View Subscription Plans →