MATHURA VRINDAVAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Vs. RAJESH SHARMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) As common question of law and facts arise in this group of appeals, all these appeals are decided and disposed of together, by this common judgment and order.

(2.) Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment(s) and order(s) passed by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad passed in the respective writ petitions, by which the High Court has quashed and set aside the various demand notices raised by the respective Development Authorities and the State of UP, the Development Authorities and the State of U.P. have preferred the present appeals.

(3.) The dispute before the High Court by way of various writ petitions was with respect to challenge to the various demand notices by way of external/internal development charges, inspection fee/supervision fee while granting of sanction layout plan, development charges, sub-division charges, stacking charges and impact fee etc. Except in one case, namely, Rekha Rani (supra), in all other cases, the Allahabad High Court as such has upheld the levy of development charges/fees. However, the other levies/demands are concerned, i.e., other than development fees/charges, more particularly the subdivision charges etc., the High Court has set aside the said levy and/or demand notices on the ground that U.P. Urban Planning and Development Act, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act, 1973 ') does not permit the levy of other charges other than provided under Sec. 15(2-A) of the Act, 1973. The High Court has also observed and held that such levy on the basis of the orders issued by the State Government, issued in exercise of powers under Sec. 41 of the Act, 1973, is illegal and bad in law. The levy of other charges, other than development fees/charges is held to be bad in law and in violation of Article 265 of the Constitution of India.