HARJINDER SINGH Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties. No purpose would be served by keeping this writ petition pending and by calling for further affidavits specifically in view of the order proposed to be passed today by this Court.

(2.) Petitioner before this Court has raised certain constructions within the territorial jurisdiction of Muzaffarnagar Development Authority. These constructions, according to the Development Authority, were illegal and, therefore, proceedings were initiated under the U.P. Urban Planning and Development Act, 1973. The petitioner made an application for compounding. This compounding application was allowed and a demand of Rs. 22,16,640/- was raised.

(3.) According to the petitioner, the demand of the compounding fee to the extent indicated above was excessive. He was advised to file an appeal under Section 27(2) of U.P. Urban Planning and Development Act, 1973. The appeal was dismissed by the Commissioner, Saharanpur Division, Saharanpur who is the Chairman of the Development Authority vide order dated 25.8.2011 on the ground that an appeal under Section 27(2) of the Act is not maintainable against the demand of compounding fee. The petitioner thereafter approached the State Government under Section 41(3) of the Act. The State Government under the order impugned dated 12.12.2011 had dismissed the revision-petition on the ground that the same is not maintainable.