M/S. SEPAL HOTEL PVT. LTD. versus STATE OF PUNJAB & ANR.

Citation: [2014] 8 S.C.R. 616 · Decided: 22-04-2014 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: S.S. NIJJAR · Disposal: Disposed off

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
B 
(2014) 8 S.C.R. 616 
M/S. SEPAL HOTEL PVT. LTD. 
v. 
STATE OF PUNJAB & ANR. 
(Civil Appeal No. 4678 of 2014) 
APRIL 22, 2014 
[SURINDER SINGH NIJJAR AND A.K. SIKRI, JJ.] 
Town Planning - Municipal Committee framed new town 
planning scheme as per which, a part of land covered by 
C 
appellant's hotel was required for construction/ widening of 
road - Notice received by appellant - Writ petition filed by 
appellant challenging the notice - Dismissed by High Court 
on ground that the scheme had attained finality and 
objections of appellant were a/so considered uls.192(1}(c) of 
D 
the Act and taken to logical conclusion - Meanwhile, in the 
case of Yogender Pal, s.192(1)(c) of the Act was declared as 
void, being violative of Art. 14 of the Constitution - Overruling 
of the provision was made prospective and cases where the 
Scheme was already finalised, remained protected - On facts, 
E 
question as to whether the Scheme in question had been 
finalised or not - Held: Answer to the issue as to whether the 
Scheme had attained finality depended upon another issue 
viz. whether objections of the appellant to the Scheme were 
disposed of or not - It is borne from the record that objections 
F 
of appellant were duly considered and then specifically 
rejected by the Municipal Committee - Main objection was 
for payment of compensation which was rejected on the 
ground that the land under the road and the parks does not 
form more than 25% and, therefore, in view of s.192 of the Act, 
G 
no compensation was payable - Demarcation was a/so 
carried out - However, as per demarcation Report of Patwari, 
30 feet road as set out in the Town Planning Scheme did not 
exist in the revenue record - At the same time, correct 
position at the site a/so not on record - Requirement of fresh 
H 
616 
SEPAL HOTEL PVT. LTD. v. STATE OF PUNJAB 
617 
demarcation at the site through Patwari - On basis of said 
A 
demarcation, if it is found that in the revenue record 30 feet 
road exists, that area be clearly demarcated and delineated, 
and thereafter the Scheme be implemented -
Punjab 
Municipal Act, 1911 - s.192(1)(c) - Haryana Municipal Act, 
1973 - s.203(1)(c). 
B 
The Municipal Commi.ttee framed a new Town 
Planning Scheme as per which, a part of land covered by 
appellant's hotel was required for construction I widening 
of road. The appellant received notice from the successor 
of the Municipal Corporation- respondent No. 2, directing 
C 
the appellant to leave. the street in terms of the Town 
Planning Scheme. The appellant filed writ petition 
challenging the notice contending that as the Scheme 
was not implemented for the last more than 30 years and 
objections filed by the appellant had not been decided, 
D 
the Scheme had lapsed and Respondent No. 2 had no 
authority to implement the same. The Hig!'t Court 
dismissed the writ petition holding that the Scheme had 
attained finality and the objections of the appellant were 
also considered under the provisions of Section 192 
(1)(c) of the Punjab Municipal Act and taken to logical 
conclusion; and thereafter it could not be said that the 
Scheme had not become final and could not be 
implemented now. 
Meanwhile, in the case of Yogender Pal, the 
appellants succeeded in their challenge to Section 
192(1)(c) of the Punjab Municipal Act which was declared 
E 
F 
as void, being violative of Article 14 o·f the Constitution. 
The aforesaid provision was held to be unconstitutional 
G 
as under this provision, to implement a Scheme, land of 
the landowner could be taken away without even paying 
any compensation. At the same time, the overruling of this 
provision was made prospective. The Court was mindful 
of the fact that there would be cases where the Schemes 
had been implemented and constructions etc. had already 
H 
618 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2014] 8 S.C.R. 
A been carried out in terrris of the Scheme and these 
Schemes which w~re already carried out were, thus, 
protected. 
In the said scenario, the question which arose for 
8 consideration before this Court was as to whether in the. 
present case the Scheme in question had been finalised 
or not. 
Disposing of the appeal, the Court 
c 
HELD:1.1. In the present case, when the new Town 
planning Scheme was framed in the year 1975, to 
implement the same, the Municipal Committee issued 
notice to the appellant on 7.6.1978 ·tor demolition of 
boundary WC!ll of the hotel and transfer the same to the 
0 Committee, which was req

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.