LexUTTAR BHARTIYA RAJAK SAMAJ PANCHAYAT BANGANGA RAJAK SAMAJ CO-OPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY (PROPOSED) & ANR. versus STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH SECRETARY & ORS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A B C D E F G H 576 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2020] 2 S.C.R. UTTAR BHARTIYA RAJAK SAMAJ PANCHAYAT BANGANGA RAJAK SAMAJ CO-OPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY (PROPOSED) & ANR. v. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH SECRETARY & ORS. (Civil Appeal Nos. 887-888 of 2020) JANUARY 31, 2020 [MOHAN M. SHANTANAGOUDAR AND R. SUBHASH REDDY, JJ.] Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act: s. 37(1) – Demand of premium @ 25% in respect of Slum Rehabilitation Scheme in terms of Notification dated 16.4.2008 – Propriety of – Letter of Intent (LOI) issued for Slum Rehabilitation Scheme on 5.1.2005, subject to clearance by Coastal Zone Management Authority (CRZ) – During pendency of proceedings before CRZ, Directives issued by Government on 16.4.2008 requiring to pay premium @ 25 % in respect of Slum Rehabilitation Scheme – Demand of premium pursuant to the Directives – challenged before High Court – High Court dismissed the petitions – Review petition also dismissed – Appeal to Supreme Court – Held: LOI was valid for a period of three months only and the same was not kept alive by the appellants, the premium is to be paid as per Government Resolution dated 16.4.2008 – Demand is in confirmity with law. Dismissing the appeals, the Court HELD: The Letter of Intent was valid for a period of three months only. If, for any reason, delay occurred in obtaining clearance from the Coastal Zone Management Authority, nothing prevented the appellants to make appropriate representation so as to keep the Letter of Intent alive. When the validity of Letter of Intent itself is for three months and if the same is not kept alive, the premium is to be paid as per the Government Resolution dated 16.4.2008. By virtue of the aforesaid notification developer/ co-operative society is required to pay premium @ 25% in terms of the Ready Reckoner, in respect of Slum Rehabilitation Schemes [2020] 2 S.C.R. 576 576 A B C D E F G H 577 proposed to be undertaken on the lands owned by the Government, Semi-Government Undertakings and local bodies. In that view of the matter the demand made by the respondents is in conformity with the law and there is no illegality in the impugned orders passed by the High Court. [Paras 11 & 12][580- C-E] CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal Nos. 887- 888 of 2020. From the Judgment and Order dated 03.05.2012 of the High Court of Judicature at Bombay in Writ Petition No. 1902 of 2010 and Order dated 01.07.2015 in Review Petition No. 13 of 2015 in Writ Petition No. 1902 of 2010. Shekhar Naphde, Sr. Adv., Ms. Sneha Ravi Iyer, Ms. Neha Sangwan, Ms. Aishwarya Dash, Advs. for the Appellants. Satyajit A. Desai, Sachin Patil, Sanjay Kharde, Samrat Shinde, Ranjit Kumar Rathod, Sunil Kumar Verma, M.A. Arunesh, Nishant K. Katneshwarkar, Advs. for the Respondents. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by R. SUBHASH REDDY, J. 1. Leave granted. 2. These civil appeals are filed by the original petitioners in Writ Petition No.1902 of 2010 filed before the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, aggrieved by the order dated 03rd May 2012 dismissing the writ petition and further order dated 01st of July 2015 dismissing the review petition. 3. In the aforesaid writ petition filed before the High Court, the appellants have challenged an order of the High Power Committee (HPC) dated 19th December 2009 by which, the demand made by the 2nd respondent Slum Rehabilitation Authority (SRA) demanding premium of an amount of Rs.8,47,69,029.69 (Rupees Eight Crores Forty Seven Lakhs Sixty Nine Thousand Twenty Nine and Sixty Nine Paise only), is confirmed in respect of Letter of Intent (LOI) dated 05th January 2005, issued in their favour for Slum Rehabilitation Scheme. The appellants also sought directions to direct the SRA to issue Commencement Certificate as per the existing guidelines. UTTAR BHARTIYA RAJAK SAMAJ PANCHAYAT BANGANGA RAJAK SAMAJ CO-OP. HSG. SOC. (PROPOSED) v. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA A B C D E F G H 578 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2020] 2 S.C.R. 4. The appellant no.1 is the registered society of slum dwellers, who are stated to be residing on plot bearing no.CS No.51, 2/51, 3/51 of Malabar Hill and Cumballa Hill Div. at Bhagwan Indrajit Road, Mumbai. The appellant no.2 is a rehabilitator who was approached by the 1st appellant-society to develop the said plot and rehabilitate its members under Slum Rehabilitation Scheme, under Maharashtra Slum Rehabilitation Act, 1976. On the proposal for the aforesaid scheme, a LOI bearing no.SRA/Eng/875/D/GL/LOI dated 05.01.2005 has
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.