THE MUNICIPAL COUNCIL, RAGHOGARH & ANR. versus NATIONAL FERTILIZER LTD. & ORS.

Citation: [2018] 1 S.C.R. 603 · Decided: 30-01-2018 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: N.V. RAMANA · Disposal: Dismissed

Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
603
THE MUNICIPAL COUNCIL, RAGHOGARH & ANR.
v.
NATIONAL FERTILIZER LTD. & ORS.
(Civil Appeal No. 2511 of 2011)
JANUARY 30, 2018
[N. V. RAMANA AND S. ABDUL NAZEER, JJ.]
Municipal Council – External development charges – Liability
of National Fertilizers Limited and Gas Authority of India Limited
to pay external development charges to the appellant-Municipal
Council – Held: If any colonizer, house construction society or
individual person constructs a colony under the supervision of
Municipal committee or Municipal corporation, as the case may
be, charges towards external development are applicable – In the
instant case, the respondents are neither colonizers nor house
construction societies or individuals – The dwelling units are
developed by contesting respondents i.e. Government entities being
PSUs with the investment of Central Government and are for their
employees only and not meant for sale or for letting out on rent
therefore, the contesting respondents are not liable to pay any
amount in the form of external development fee as demanded by the
appellants.
Dismissing the appeals, the Court
HELD: Whether the contesting respondents herein, i.e.
National Fertilizers Limited and Gas Authority of India Limited,
are liable to pay external development charges to the appellant—
Municipal Council as per its demand?
If any colonizer, house construction society or individual
person constructs a colony under the supervision of Municipal
Committee or Municipal Corporation, as the case may be, Rs.5/-
per sq. mtr. towards external development charges are applicable.
While so, in the case on hand, the contesting respondents are
neither colonizers nor house construction societies or individuals.
The dwelling units developed by them are for their employees
only and not meant for sale or for letting out on rent.  Apparently,
the construction of dwelling units and the residential areas
603
[2018] 1 S.C.R. 603
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
604
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2018] 1 S.C.R.
developed by the contesting respondents are done by the
contesting respondents i.e. Government entities being Public
Sector Undertakings with the investment of Central Government.
The contesting respondents are not liable to pay any amount in
the form of external development fee as demanded by the
appellants.  [Paras 2, 12 and 13] [604-FG; 607-F-H; 608-B]
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 2511 of
2011.
From the Judgment and Order dated 03.08.2007 of the High Court
of Madhya Pradesh, Jabalpur, Bench at Gwalior in First Appeal No. 1 of
1996.
WITH
C. A. No. 2512 of 2011.
B. K. Satija, Adv. for the Appellants.
Dipak Kumar Jena, Manish Grewal, Jaladhar Das, Ms. Minakshi
Ghosh, Mishra Saurabh, Vikas Upadhyay, B. S. Banthia, Vidit Monga,
T. V. Ratnam, M. Sowri Dev, Dr. Rajaram Punna,  Advs. for the
Respondents.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
N. V. RAMANA, J. 1. These two Appeals arise out of a common
Judgment passed on 3rd August, 2007 in First Appeal Nos.1 of 1996 and
175 of 1995, respectively, by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh, Bench
at Gwalior.
2. The short question that arises for our consideration in these
appeals is whether the contesting respondents herein, i.e. National
Fertilizers Limited and Gas Authority of India Limited, are liable to pay
external development charges to the appellant—Municipal Council as
per its demand?
3. Both the contesting respondents in these appeals were allotted
forest lands within the municipal limits of the appellant Council.
Subsequently, the respondents were served with a notice calling upon
them to deposit external development charges @ Rs.5/- per sq. meter in
consonance with Government of Madhya Pradesh, Housing and
Environment Department, Notification No. F.3-39/32/85, dated 28-11-1985.
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
605
Raising objections, respondents challenged the notices by filing Civil Suits
before the District Judge, Guna, Madhya Pradesh contending that they
are Central Government entities and would not come under the purview
of the said Notification and hence sought declaration and permanent
injunction restraining the appellant from demanding external development
fee from them.
4. The District Judge, Guna by separate judgments dated 11th
October, 1995 decreed the Suits in favour of respondents and declared
that the defendants (appellant and proforma respondents herein) jointly
or severally have no right to recover amount by name of external
development fee and no amount shall be recovered from the pla

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