Allowed

Mukesh Kumar and Another v. Greater Noida Industrial Development Authority and Another

Allahabad HC3 Feb 2023WRIC/20864/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the writ petition, quashing the demand for an enhanced land allotment rate. Relying on a prior precedent, the Court held that the Authority cannot mandate a rate higher than that fixed in the Information Brochure (Rs. 3,425/- per sq. meter). It directed the refund of excess amounts paid under protest.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition allowed; demand for Rs. 5,900/- per sq. meter quashed; allottees directed to be charged Rs. 3,425/- per sq. meter plus location charges; refund of excess directed.

Mukesh Kumar and Another Vs Greater Noida… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 39

¶2

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 20864 of 2008 Petitioner :- Mukesh Kumar And Another Respondent :- Greater Noida Industrial Development Authority And Another

¶3

Counsel for Petitioner :- Ashok Bhatnagar,Rohan Gupta,Shashi Kant Gupta Counsel for Respondent :- Pradeep Kumar,Bhanu Bhushan Jauhari,Nisheeth Yadav

¶4

Hon'ble Mrs. Sunita Agarwal,J. Hon'ble Vipin Chandra Dixit,J.

¶5

Heard Ms. Kriti Gupta, learned Advocate holding brief of Sri Rohan Gupta, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri Ramendra Pratap Singh, learned Advocate appearing for the respondent Greater NOIDA and perused the record.

¶6

The challenged in the present petition is to the condition put in the allotment letter dated 26.03.2008, whereby demand for enhanced rate has been made by Greater Noida Authority. Further prayer in the writ petition is to re-schedule the payment of instalments by applying the rate @ Rs. 3,425/- per sq. meter as contained in the brochure (Annexure 1 in the writ petition) and further execute the lease deed in favour of the petitioners pursuant to allotment letter dated 26.03.2008.

¶7

The dispute in the present writ petition is about demand for enhanced rate of Rs. 5,900/- per sq. meter of the allotment made against the terms and conditions of the brochure itself. It is pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioners that in the similar facts and circumstances with respect to the same claim, a bunch of writ petitions with the leading writ petition bearing Writ -C No. 100 of 2008 (Anand Kumar vs. Greater Noida Industrial Development Authority & Others) has been allowed, vide judgment and order dated 14.08.2012. In the said case, it was held by this Court as under :-

¶8

"We have given our thoughtful consideration to various pleas raised by the counsel for the parties. We find that in the Information Brochure, the rate of allotment of plots has been specifically fixed at Rs. 3,425/- per sq. meter. There is no clause in the Information Brochure which permits escalation of the price of the plots. Clause R-1 of Section VI of the Information Brochure which authorizes the CEO or any other officer authorized by the CEO to make modification in the terms and conditions of the allotment, would not ipso facto authorize such officer to increase the rate of allotment without

¶9

there being any justifiable reason. The revision of circle rate by itself will not empower the authorities to increase the rate of allotment of plots for the reason that the draw of lots was held on 19.1.2005 and if for one reason or the other, the allotment letter has not been issued by the Authority, the successful allottees cannot be made to suffer. While issuing the Information Brochure, the Authority must have kept the prevailing circle rate for allotment of plots and they cannot unilaterally increase the price for withholding the issuance of the allotment letter for which the successful allottees had to approach this court several times.

¶10

That being the position, we are of the considered opinion that Greater Noida Industrial Development Authority, Greater Noida (respondent no. 1) can only charge the rate as fixed in the Information Brochure. The Authority cannot demand rate other than Rs. 3,425/- per sq. meter from the successful allottees, plus the location charges as given in Clause A-7.2, can only be demanded.

¶11

It would have been another thing if the entire scheme would have been cancelled and a fresh scheme would have been announced by the Greater Noida Industrial Development Authority, Greater Noida, fixing new rates for allotment of plots.

¶12

The writ petition succeeds and is allowed.

¶13

If the successful allottees have deposited the enhanced amount under protest, respondent no. 1 shall refund the excessive amount within 30 days."

¶14

The aforesaid judgment of this Court has been upheld with the dismissal of Special Leave Petition (Civil) Nos. 34942-34943 of 2013 (Greater Noida Industrial Development Authority and others vs. Anand Kumar) (Annexure No. 2 to the rejoinder affidavit) vide judgment and order dated 20.08.2015 passed by the Apex Court.

¶15

There is no dispute about the fact that the aforesaid decisions are pertaining to the same claim and the dispute raised herein is squarely covered by the decision of this Court.

¶16

We, therefore, allow the preset writ petition quashing the demand raised by the Greater Noida Authority for enhanced amount of Rs. 5,900/- per sq. meter on the allotment and direct that the Greater Noida cannot demand rate other than Rs. 3,425/- per sq. meter from the successful allottees. In addition to the same, location charges as given in Clause A-7.2 can only be demanded. It is further directed that if the successful allottees have deposited the enhanced amount under protest, the excess amount shall be refunded by the respondent within a period of one month.

¶17

Order Date :- 3.2.2023 sailesh

¶18

Digitally signed by :- SAILESH PRAJAPATI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Mukesh Kumar and Another v. Greater Noida Industrial Development Authority and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mukesh Kumar and Another v. Greater Noida Industrial Development Authority and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Vidyawati Devi Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Ram Murti Dubey Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Ramchandra Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Smt. Savitri Devi and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Shiv Dayal Singh and 26 Others Vs Union of India and 3 Others

Ram Sevak and 12 Others Vs Union of India and 3 Others