concessional rate, since the Petitioner was a charitable trust. That was
in 1990. The Petitioner, accordingly, proceeded to pay a sum of
Rs.28,596/- towards such concessional land price. Since, however, the
plot was encroached by slum dwellers, no development could take place.
An SRA scheme was, thereupon, sanctioned by the Slum Rehabilitation
Authority (“SRA”) in respect of the subject plot of land together with
other adjoining land. This scheme was for eight different societies
including the Petitioner. On 23 January 2009, even an LOI was issued
by SRA for the scheme, according to which, land premium was deposited
by the developer. Under the LOI, a portion of the land, forming part of
the composite development scheme, has been allotted to the Petitioner
society for construction of a student hostel. In the backdrop of these
facts, by its communication dated 10 February 2017, the Collector
demanded premium from all eight societies, who were part of the
composite redevelopment including the Petitioner, who was to be
allotted 879.90 sq.mtrs. of land forming part of the larger piece of land.
The demand in the case of the Petitioner was for a sum of
Rs.25,58,749/- towards principal amount of concessional price in
accordance with the ready reckoner of 2007 and a further sum of
Rs.27,58,078/- towards interest. This order was the subject matter of
challenge in a writ petition filed by the federation of eight societies. At
the hearing of the petition, this Court noted that whilst the federation
was not averse to paying additional land premium over and above what
was proposed in the year 1983-84, it objected to the proposed levy of
interest on this premium. It was submitted that the land premium was
determined and communicated to the Petitioner for the first time by the
impugned order of 10 February 2017 and such premium not having
