High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Nagpur Bench — Writ Petitions Nos. 4828/2022, 1890/2023 and 5386/2022 (Radha Madhav Developers v. State of Maharashtra & ors.) — Judgment dated 15/09/2025 (Coram: Smt. M. S. Jawalkar & Pravin S. Patil, JJ.; Per Smt. M. S. Jawalkar, J.). Petitioner-developer challenged NMRDA's levy of infrastructure cost pursuant to Sanction Modification (SM-1) dated 05/01/2018 in the final development plan for Nagpur Metropolitan Area, arguing it violated Articles 14 and 265 of the Constitution and fell outside the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966, and sought striking down of the rate chart effective 01/01/2021 and quashing of demands including infrastructure cost and STP charges. The Court held: (i) section 22(m) MRTP Act expressly contemplates imposition of fees, charges and premium fixed by the State Government or Planning Authority for grant of additional FSI or special permissions, and the levy is directly relatable to section 22(m) read with section 31(1) via the sanctioned modification dated 05/01/2018 and Regulation No.4.2(I)(v) of UDCPR-2020; (ii) infrastructure cost contemplates integrated peripheral/offsite development across localities and is distinct from development charge under section 124A — hence not double taxation; (iii) the levy carries the essential element of quid pro quo (roads, water supply, sewerage, electricity etc.) and cannot be termed a 'tax'; (iv) having executed Development Agreements dated 18/06/2012, 01/08/2014 and 21/07/2022 consenting to peripheral development/infrastructure charges, filed affidavits and undertakings, deposited Rs.6,91,89,600/-, and applied under section 44 MRTP Act / UDCPR-2020, the petitioner, bound by approbate-reprobate/doctrine of election, cannot challenge the levy as violative of Article 265; (v) the matter being one of State policy backed by law, no interference is warranted. Petitions dismissed; Rule discharged; no order as to costs.
