UPENDRA CHOUDHURY Vs. BULANDSHAHAR DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These proceedings have been initiated under Article 32 of the Constitution by a purchaser, seeking directions in respect of a real estate project called 'Sushant Megapolis', which is being developed by the fifth, sixth and seventh respondents. The reliefs which have been sought, while invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 32, as noted above, are in the following terms:

(2.) The above extract would indicate that the primary relief which has been sought is (i) cancellation of all the agreements; (ii) refund of moneys to purchasers; and in the alternative (iii) ensuring that the construction is carried out and that the premises are handed over within a reasonable period of time. Incidental to the above reliefs, the petitioner seeks the constitution of a Committee headed by a former Judge of this Court together with other persons to monitor and handle the projects of the developer in the present case. The petitioner also seeks a forensic audit, an investigation by CBI and by other authorities such as the Serious Fraud Investigation Office and Enforcement Directorate.

(3.) Mr Manoj V George, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, submits that, in another project of the developer which is being implemented at Lucknow, notice was issued on a petition under Article 32 of the Constitution (Pawan Kumar Kushwaha and Ors. v. Lucknow Development Authority and Ors. Writ Petition (Civil) No 1001 of 2020) on 20 November 2020 by a two-Judge Bench of this Court of which one of us was a member. On the above grounds, it has been submitted that it would be appropriate for this Court to issue notice and tag the writ petition under Article 32 with the earlier proceedings.