AMBICAPRATAPSINH SISODIA Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Mr. Milind Sathe, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Mr. R. S. Apte, learned Counsel for the respondents.

(2.) ASSAILING the order of the Appellate Authority dated 9-8-1991 under section 33 of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 (for short, "act of 1976"), confirming the order of the Competent Authority dated 8-4-1985 whereby final statement under section 9 of the Act of 1976 was issued by the Competent Authority, twofold submission was advanced by the learned Counsel for the petitioner: (i) that under the Building Regulations, the petitioner is required to keep as open space two third of the area of the entire land for the enjoyment of such building and accordingly under section 2 (g) (i), the petitioner is entitled to 500 sq. mts. as land appurtenant to each structure and, therefore, the Competent Authority committed error in declining the petitioner to retain area to that extent and (ii) that the petitioner has already made an application for exemption under section 21 and in the alternative under section 20 of the Act of 1976 and, therefore, despite final statement having been made under section 10 of the said Act, the State Government is bound to consider the said application on its own merits.

(3.) BEREFT of unnecessary details, brief facts leading to the controversy are: the petitioner is the owner of land admeasuring 17889. 38 sq. mtrs. situate at 12-A Lal Bahadur Shastri Marg, Pune. The said property consists of main bungalow, an outhouse, garage, servants quarters, godowns, stables etc. According to the petitioner, all these structures admeasure 1642 sq. mts. The land is covered by Building Regulations called "the scheme of Restrictions". It is the petitioners case that under said building Regulations the maximum permissible built up area is restricted to one third of the plot area and consequently two third in unbuildable land is required to be kept as open space and has to be treated as land appurtenant. The petitioner filed a statement under section 6 (1) of the Act of 1976 in respect of the said land. A joint inspection was carried out by the Authority concerned and as per the computation by the Competent Authority, the details of built up area, land appurtenant and additional land appurtenant are as under :