(1.) THE ten petitioners in this case have formed themselves into an association for the development of a residential colony in Ghaziabad (district Meerut). In accordance with the directions given to them by the authorities from time to time they revised their layout plan and it was eventually sanctioned by the Prescribed Authority established under the U.P. Regulation of Building Operations Act 1958. The sanction was conveyed to the petitioners In a letter dated 30-8-1962; but on 6-9-3962 another letter was addressed to the petitioners by the Prescribed Authority, informing them that the Government had stayed the operation of the sanction; and eventually on 3-10-1962 the Prescribed Authority informed the petitioners that the sanction was withdrawn. In the present petition the petitioners ask for a writ of certiorari to quash the orders dated 6-9-1962 and 3-10-1962, staying and withdrawing the sanction that has been granted on 30-8-1962, and for a writ of mandamus commanding the opposite parties (the State of U.P., the Land Acquisition Officer, the Prescribed Authority and the Controlling Authority of the Ghaziabad Regulated Area, the Improvement Trust of Ghaziabad and the Ghaziabad Municipal Board) to abstain from interference with the implementation of that sanction.
(2.) UNDER the U.P. Regulation of Building Operations Act enacted in the year 1958 (for the regulation of building operations with a view to prevent haphazard development of urban and rural areas) a Regulated Area has been declared in and around the town of Ghaziabad and a Prescribed Authority had been appointed and a Controlling Authority set up for the Area to carry out the provisions of the Act. S. 6 of the Act prohibits the development of any site and the erection or material alteration of any building in the Regulated Area without the previous permission in writing of the prescribed Authority; and under Section 7 the Prescribed Authority "after making such enquiry as it considers necessary in relation to any directions which may have been issued under this Act or in relation to any other matter" has either to grant or to refuse permission (subject to such conditions as may be specified in the order). Section 7-A empowers the Prescribed Authority, after permission has been granted, to cancel such permission where it is satisfied that the permission was granted "in consequence of any material misrepresentation made or any fraudulent statement or information furnished". Under Section 15 of the Act an order of the Prescribed Authority refusing or granting permission under Section 7 or cancelling permission under Section 7-A is appealable to the Controlling Authority, whose decision shall be final and not be open to question in any Court. The State Government, however, has revisional powers under Section 15-A in respect of any case disposed of by the Controlling Authority; and under Section 14 the State Government has been granted the further power of giving directions on matters referred to in Section 5 (including the final omnibus clause of that section, which covers "any other matter which is necessary for the proper planning of any regulated area and for preventing building being erected haphazardly in such area").
(3.) THE stand taken by the opposite-parties In this matter is set forth in para 5 of the counter-affidavit sworn by Sri B.J. Khodaiji, Deputy Secretary in the Local Self Government Department, and filed in this Court on 7-7-1965, which runs as follows :-