# Smt. Rekha Rani v. State of U.P. and Ors

- **Citation:** (2014) 1 ILRA 70
- **Court:** High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
- **Decided:** 2013-09-26
- **Bench:** Arun Tandon, Anjani Kumar Mishra
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/smt-rekha-rani-v-state-of-u-p-and-ors-42819
- **Pages:** 28

## Headnote

U.P. Urban Planning & Development Act,
1973-Section-15(2-A)-Demand of external
and
internal
development
fees,
subdivision charges, compounding fee in
respect of sub-division-whether can be
held proper-held-'No'-so long statutory
Rules by exercising power under section
15(2-A), 38-A not framed-development
authorities restrained from collecting any
development fees-until statutory rules are
framed-amount already recovered-should
be
returned
withing
month.
1 All] Smt. Rekha Rani Vs. State of U.P. and Ors.
71
Held: Para-93
In view of the aforesaid settled legal
provisions as also in view of the fact that
the State Government for years has not
chosen to frame any rules under section
15(2-A) or Section 38-A of Act, 1973, we
have no hesitation to hold that the
Development Authority has no competence
to levy or realise any development fee,
mutation charges, stacking fees and water
charges etc. which are required to be
prescribed under section 15(2A) of the
1973 Act as well as city development
charges and land use conversion charges,
as are to be prescribed under Section 38-A
of Act, 1973.

U.P. Urban Planning & Development Act
1973-Section-38-A-Demand towards subdivision and compounding charges-to set
off the area required to be left open-illegal.

Held:Para-104
Therefore, we hold that the Development
Authority cannot levy any sub division
charge or compounding fee to set off the
area which is required to be left open
under the building bye-laws.

Demand of Bank guarantee advanceTowards rain water harvesting systemwhether can be realised from allottees?-
held-'No'-such
condition
can
be
in
sanctioning order-if not obeyed should
be held responsible.

Held:Para-119
We, therefore, hold that the demand of
bank guarantee in advance for the cost
of rain water harvesting system to be
installed in the building is uncalled for.
However, we clarify that it shall be open
to the development authority to take all
actions as permissible under Act, 1973
without any leniency whatsoever, if the
conditions mentioned in the sanctioning
order are not obeyed by the developer or
by the person concerned.

Case Law discussed:
(996) 10 SCC 425; W.P. No. 23281 of 2001;
(2006) 6 SCC 699; (2013) 8 SCC 693; 2006(1)
AWC 834; (2010) 4 ADJ 368; W.P. No. 48415 of
2007; W.P. No. 23793 of 2010; (2011) 5 SCC 360;
(1992) 3 SCC 285; 2006(1) AWC page 834;
2010(4) ADJ 368; 2009(8) SCC 492; 2012(4) SCC
page 578; 2011(5) SCC 360.

## Text

_Characters 0–39,920 of 91,221. This is a partial read: ask again with offset=39920 for what follows._

70 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
the examination and not for Respondent 1
only. It is a matter of chance that the High
Court was examining the answer sheets
relating to Law. Had it been other subjects
like Physics, Chemistry and Mathematics,
we are unable to understand as to whether
such a course could have been adopted by
the High Court. Therefore, we are of the
considered opinion that such a course was
not permissible to the High Court."

11. Accordingly, the view taken by
the Commission that there had been two
conflicting expert reports, therefore, the
deletion of those questions from the zone of
consideration would be a safer option,
cannot be said to be arbitrary in the facts
and circumstances of the case, so as to call
for interference in exercise of our power of
judicial review. It is quite possible that the
answer suggested by the petitioners may be
correct, but unless we are in a position to
adjudicate on their correctness, we cannot
sit over the wisdom of the Commission,
particularly in the light of the apex court's
decision noticed herein above.

12. We, therefore, accept the
decision taken by the Commission to
delete as many as nine law questions (two
were deleted earlier and seven subsequent
to our order dated 26.09.2013). Likewise,
we accept the decision of the Commission
to delete six questions in the general
knowledge paper (four questions were
deleted earlier by the Commission and two
questions were deleted pursuant to our order
dated 26.09.2013). The Commission will
evaluate the answers of the respective
candidates on the basis of its decision, as
approved herein above, and would publish a
fresh merit list of the U.P. Judicial Service,
Civil Judge (Junior Division) Preliminary
Examination 2013, in accordance with law,
within three weeks from today, and would
thereafter hold the Mains Examination, in
accordance with law.

13.

With
the
aforesaid
observations/directions, the writ petitions
stand disposed of.
--------
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
CIVIL SIDE
DATED: ALLAHABAD 12.12.2013

BEFORE
THE HON'BLE ARUN TANDON, J.
THE HON'BLE ANJANI KUMAR MISHRA, J.

Writ C No. 56485 of 2013 connected with no.
53710 of 2013, no. 54482 of 2013, no.
57531 of 2013, no. 55784 of 2013, no.
56837 of 2013, no. 19095 of 2009, no.
59969 of 2012, no. 60468 of 2013, no.
38066 of 2012, no. 62690 of 2013, no.
54466 of 2013, no. 60841 of 2013, no.
64151 of 2013, no. 63362 of 2013, no.
67155 of 2013, no. 63173 of 2010, no.
67381 of 2013, no. 67155 of 2013, no.
20280 of 2013, no. 67153 of 2013.

Smt. Rekha Rani... Petitioner
Versus
State of U.P. and Ors.... Respondents

Counsel for the Petitioner:
Sri R.K. Sharma

Counsel for the Respondents:
C.S.C., Sri A.P. Paul, Sri Vrindavan Mishra.

U.P. Urban Planning & Development Act,
1973-Section-15(2-A)-Demand of external
and
internal
development
fees,
subdivision charges, compounding fee in
respect of sub-division-whether can be
held proper-held-'No'-so long statutory
Rules by exercising power under section
15(2-A), 38-A not framed-development
authorities restrained from collecting any
development fees-until statutory rules are
framed-amount already recovered-should
be
returned
withing
month.
1 All] Smt. Rekha Rani Vs. State of U.P. and Ors.
71
Held: Para-93
In view of the aforesaid settled legal
provisions as also in view of the fact that
the State Government for years has not
chosen to frame any rules under section
15(2-A) or Section 38-A of Act, 1973, we
have no hesitation to hold that the
Development Authority has no competence
to levy or realise any development fee,
mutation charges, stacking fees and water
charges etc. which are required to be
prescribed under section 15(2A) of the
1973 Act as well as city development
charges and land use conversion charges,
as are to be prescribed under Section 38-A
of Act, 1973.

U.P. Urban Planning & Development Act
1973-Section-38-A-Demand towards subdivision and compounding charges-to set
off the area required to be left open-illegal.

Held:Para-104
Therefore, we hold that the Development
Authority cannot levy any sub division
charge or compounding fee to set off the
area which is required to be left open
under the building bye-laws.

Demand of Bank guarantee advanceTowards rain water harvesting systemwhether can be realised from allottees?-
held-'No'-such
condition
can
be
in
sanctioning order-if not obeyed should
be held responsible.

Held:Para-119
We, therefore, hold that the demand of
bank guarantee in advance for the cost
of rain water harvesting system to be
installed in the building is uncalled for.
However, we clarify that it shall be open
to the development authority to take all
actions as permissible under Act, 1973
without any leniency whatsoever, if the
conditions mentioned in the sanctioning
order are not obeyed by the developer or
by the person concerned.

Case Law discussed:
(996) 10 SCC 425; W.P. No. 23281 of 2001;
(2006) 6 SCC 699; (2013) 8 SCC 693; 2006(1)
AWC 834; (2010) 4 ADJ 368; W.P. No. 48415 of
2007; W.P. No. 23793 of 2010; (2011) 5 SCC 360;
(1992) 3 SCC 285; 2006(1) AWC page 834;
2010(4) ADJ 368; 2009(8) SCC 492; 2012(4) SCC
page 578; 2011(5) SCC 360.

(Delivered by Hon'ble Arun Tandon, J.)

1. The above mentioned writ petitions
have been filed challenging the orders of the
various Development Authorities constituted
under Section 4 of the U.P. Urban Planning
and Development Act, 1973 (hereinafter
referred to as the "Act, 1973") demanding (a)
External development fee (b) Internal
development fee (c )Sub-division charges (d)
park fee (e) compounding fee in respect of
sub-division
charges,
(f)
inspection/
supervision charges, (g) labour cess, (h) bank
guarantee for the value of the cost of the land
and the constructions which are required to
be raised by a developer of more than 3000
sq. meters of land and above, under the
Government Order dated 26.9.2011 (k) bank
guarantee for rain water harvesting system to
be installed in the buildings and lastly (l)
Impact fee, which is being demanded by the
Gorakhpur Development Authority only.

2. We have heard Sri H.N. Singh,
Senior Advocate, Sri Anoop Trivedi, Sri
Rajeev Kumar Saini, Sri R.K. Saini, Sri R.K.
Sharma, Sri K.D. Tripathi, Sri Pankaj Kumar
Shukla, Sri Neeraj Kumar Srivastava, Sri
Arvind Srivastava, Sri Bheem Singh, Sri
Sauraubh Tiwari, Sri Sushil Singh, Sri Vinay
Khare, Sri Satish Chaturvedi, Sri Ajit Ray,
Sri Jamal Khan and Sri Promod Kumar
Srivastava advocates on behalf of petitioners,
we have also heard Sri Ramesh Upadhay
Chief Standing Counsel on behalf of the
State, and Sri Ashwani Mishra, Senior
Advocate assisted by Sri A.B. Paul Advocate
on behalf of Allahabad Development
Authority, Sri H.N. Singh Advocate on
behalf of Aligarh Development Authority,
Sri B.D. Pandey on Advocate behalf of
72 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
Gorakhpur Development Authority, Sri
Dhamendra Shukla Advocate on behalf of
Bareilly Development Authority, Sri Rajesh
Kumar Pandey Advocate on behalf of
Muzaffar Nagar Development Authority, Sri
J.N. Maurya Advocate on behalf of Agra
Development Authority and Sri Prem
Prakash Yadav Advocate on behalf of
Bulandshahar Development Authority.

3. These writ petitions raise common
question of facts and law with regard to the
competence of the Development Authorities
constituted under Act 1973 to levy and
demand the aforesaid fees before sanctioning
the building plan as per the application
submitted under Section 14 of the 1973.

4. The petitioners have been clubbed
together and are being decided under this
common judgement.

5. It may be recorded that the
demand under the following heads: i.e. (a)
permit fees (b) malwa fee (c) water fees
(d) Triveni Mahotsav fee, has not been
challenged before us. The petitioners have
no objection to the payment thereof.

6. The petitioners question the levy
of external development fee, internal
development fee, referable to Section
15(2-A) of Act, 1973.

7. The other fees, which are questioned
in the present writ petitions, namely, the sub
division charges, the compounding fees in
respect of the sub-division, supervision fee
and inspection fees, are not covered by
Section 15(2-A) of the Act, 1973.

8. In addition to the above, there is a
challenge to the demand of bank guarantee
for the value of the land and the
constructions required to be raised qua the
houses for the economically weaker section
and lower income group persons as also to
the demand of bank guarantee for the rain
water harvesting system which is to be
provided in terms of and under the
Government Order issued on the subject, in
new buildings to be constructed.

9. When the petitioners before this
Court had filed plans for grant of sanction
under Section 14 of the Act, 1973, demand
has been made by respondent-Development
Authorities to deposit the fees under various
heads including those detailed herein above
before grant of such sanction.

10. At the very outset it may be
recorded that the Apex Court in the case of
State of U.P. & Others Vs. Malti Kaul (Smt.)
& Another, reported in (1996) 10 SCC 425,
had upheld the power to demand the
development fee by the Development
Authorities having regard to language of
Sections 33, 41 read with Section 14 and
Section 56 (2) of Act, 1973 but subsequent
thereto, there has been amendments in the
Act, 1973 which have materially altered the
legal position.

11. The amendments, which have
been introduced by U.P. Act No. 3 of
1997 and U.P. Act No. 1 of 2008, material
for our purposes, are as follows:

12. City development charge has been
defined under Section 2 (ddd). Development
fee has been defined under Section 2 (ggg).
Section 2 (ii) defines mutation charges.
Section 2 (kk) defines stacking fees. Section
2 (ll) defines water fees. Amended Section
15 (2-A) of Act, 1973 provides for levy of
development fees, mutation charges, stacking
fees and water fees. 3rd Proviso to Section
15 (3) of Act, 1973 confers a right upon the
Development Authority to get the fees and
1 All] Smt. Rekha Rani Vs. State of U.P. and Ors.
73
charges levied under sub-section (2-A)
deposited before granting permission as
required under Section 14 of Act, 1973.

13. The amendments made in the
definition clause of Act, 1973 read as
follows:

"2. Definitions.---In this Act unless
the context otherwise requires----

...

(ddd)
'city
development
charge'
means the charge levied on a private
developer under Section 38-A for the
development of the land;

(ggg) 'development fee' means the
fee levied upon a person or body under
Section 15 for construction of road, drain,
sewer line, electric supply and watersupply lines in the development area by
the Development Authority;

(ii) "mutation charges" means the
charges levied under Section 15 upon the
person seeking mutation in his name of a
property allotted by the Authority to
another person;

[(kk) "stacking fees" means the fees
levied under Section 15 upon the person
or body who keeps building materials on
the land of the Authority or on a public
street or public place;

[(ll) "water fees" means the fees
levied under Section 15 upon a person or
body for using water supplied by the
Authority for building operation or
construction of buildings;]"

14. The other provisions of the Act,
1973 relevant for resolving the issue
involved are:

"Section 7. Objects of the Authority.-
The objects of the Authority shall be
promote and secure the development of
the development area according to plan
and for that purpose the Authority shall
have the Power to acquire, hold, manage
and dispose of land and other property, to
carry out building, engineering, mining
and other operations, to execute works in
connection with the supply of water and
electricity to dispose of sewage and to
provide and maintain other services and
amenities and generally to do anything
necessary or expedient for purposes of
such development and for purposes
incidental thereto:

Provided that save as provided In this
Act nothing contained in this Act shall be
construed as authorising the disregard by
the Authority of any law for the time
being in force."

15. Section 8 of the Act, 1973
contemplates the preparation of the
master plan for the development area and
Section 9 of the Act, 1973 provides for
the
Zonal
development
plans.
The
sections read as follow:-

"8. Civil survey of, and master plan
for the development area:-

(1) The Authority shall, as soon as
may be, prepare a master plan for the
development area.

(2) The master plan shall-define the
various zones into which the development
area may be divided for the purposes of
development and indicate the manner in
which the land in each zone is proposed to
be used (whether by the carrying out
thereon of development or otherwise) and
the
stages
by
which
any
such
development shall be carried out; and

serve as a basic pattern of framework
within which the Zonal development
plans of the various zones may be
prepared.

(3) The master plan may provide for
any other matter which may be necessary
74 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
for the proper development of the
development area.

9. Zonal Development plans.-

(1)
Simultaneously
with
the
preparation of the master plan or as soon
as may be thereafter, the Authority shall
proceed with the preparation of a zonal
development" plan for each of the zones
into which the development area may be
divided.

(2) A zonal development plan may-

(a) contain a site-plan and use-plan
for the development of the zone and show
the approximate locations and extents of
land uses proposed in the zone for such
things as public buildings and other public
works and utilities, roads, housing,
recreation, industry, business, markets,
schools, hospitals and public and private
open spaces and other categories of public
and private uses;

(b)
specify
the
standards
of
population density and building density;

(c ) show every area in the zone
which may, in the opinion of the
Authority, be required or declared for
development or re-development; and

(d) In particular, contain, provisions
regarding all or any of the following
matters, namely-

(i) the division of any site into plots
for the erection of buildings;

(ii) the allotment or reservation of
land for roads, open spaces, gardens,
recreation-grounds, schools, markets and
other public purposes:

(iii) the development of any area into
a township or colony and the restrictions
and conditions subject to which such
development may be undertaken or
carried out,

(iv) the erection of buildings on any
site and the restrictions and conditions in
regard to the open spaces to be
maintained in or around buildings and
height and character of buildings:

(v) the alignment of buildings of any
site;

(vi) the architectural features of the
elevation or frontage of any building to be
erected on any site,

(vii) the number of residential
buildings which may be erected on plot or
site;

(viii) the amenities to be provided in
relation to any site or buildings on such
site whether before or after the erection of
buildings and the person or authority by
whom or at whose expense such amenities
are to be provided:

(ix) the prohibitions or restrictions
regarding erection of shops. work-shops,
warehouses of factories or buildings of a
specified architectural feature or buildings
designed for particular purposes in the
locality,

(x) the maintenance of walls, fences,
hedges
or
any
other
structural
or
architectural construction and the height
at which they shall be maintained:

(xi) the restrictions regarding the use
of any site for purposes other than
erection of buildings;

(xii) any other matter which is
necessary for the proper development of
the zone or any area thereof according to
plan and for preventing buildings being
erected haphazardly, in such zone or
area."

16. Section 10 of the Act, 1973
contemplates submission of the plans to
the State Government and its power to
issue directions in the matter of the
modification etc. of such plans.

17. Section 11 of the Act, 1973
provides for the approval of the plans by
the State Government.
1 All] Smt. Rekha Rani Vs. State of U.P. and Ors.
75

18. Section 14 of the Act, 1973 deals
with the development of land in the
development area and prohibits any
development activities being undertaken
or continued except in accordance with
the plans and without approval of the
development authority.

19. Section 15 of the Act, 1973
provides for making of an application in
writing before the Vice-Chairman for
permission under Section 14 in such
manner, as may be prescribed by byelaws and has to contain such particulars,
as may be prescribed by rules. Subsection (2-A) of Section 15 permits levy
of development fees, mutation charges,
stacking fees and water fees in such
manner and at such rates as may be
prescribed.

20. Relevant portion of Section 15
(2-A) of Act, 1973 is quoted below:-

"15. Application for permission.--(1)
Every person or body (other than any
department of Government or any local
authority)
desiring
to
obtain
the
permission referred to in Section 14 shall
make an application in writing to the
[Vice-Chairman] in such form and
containing such particulars in respect of
the development to which the application
relates as may be prescribed by (byelaws].

(2) Every application under subsection (1) shall be accompanied by such
particulars as may be prescribed by rules.

[(2-A)
The
Authority
shall
be
entitled
to
levy
development
fees,
mutation charges, stacking fees and water
fees in such manner and at such rates as
may be prescribed :

Provided that the amount of stacking
fees levied in respect of an area which is
not being developed or has not been
developed, by the Authority, shall be
transferred to the local authority within
whose local limits such area is situated.]

(3) On the receipt of an application
for permission under sub-section (1), the
[Vice-chairman]
after
making
such
inquiry as it considers necessary in
relation to any matter specified in clause
(d) of sub-section (2) of Section 9 or in
relation to any other matters, shall, by
order
in
writing
either
grant
the
permission, subject to such conditions, if
any, as may be specified in the order or
refuse to grant such permission :

Provided that before making an order
refusing such permission, the applicant
shall be given a reasonable opportunity to
show cause why the permission should
not be refused :

Provided further that the [ViceChairman] may before passing any order
of such application give an opportunity to
the applicant to make any correction
therein or to supply any further particulars
of documents or to make good any
deficiency in the requisite fee with a view
to bringing it in conformity with the
relevant rules or regulations :

[Provided also that before granting
permission, referred to in Section14, the
Vice-chairman may get the fees and the
charges levied, under sub-section (2-A)
deposited;]

......................."

21. Section 33 of the Act, 1973
provides for development activities to be
carried on by the development authority
on behalf of the owner and in the event of
his default to levy cess in certain cases.

22. Section 34 of the Act, 1973
permits the development authority to
transfer the developed areas with or
without amenities to the local bodies on
76 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
the conditions to be settled by the
Government.

23. Section 35 of the Act, 1973
provides for levy of betterment charges
and reads and follows:-

"35. Power of Authority to levy
betterment charges.-

(1) Where in the opinion of the
Authority, as a consequence of any
development
scheme
having
been
executed by the Authority in any
development area, the value of any
property in that area which has been
benefited
by
the
development,
has
increased or will increase, the Authority
shall be entitled to levy upon the owner of
the property or any person having an
interest therein a betterment charge in
respect of the increase in value of the
property resulting from the execution of
the development:

Provided that no betterment charge
shall be levied in respect lands owned by
Government:

Provided further that where any land
belonging to Government has been
granted by way of lease or licence by
Government to any person, then that land
and any building situate thereon shall be
subject to a betterment charge under this
section.

(2) Such betterment charge shall be
an amount-

(i) in respect of any property situate
in the township or colony if any
developed or in other area developed or
redeveloped, equal to one third of the
amount, and

(ii) in respect of property situated
outside such township, colony or other
area, as aforesaid, not exceeding one-third
of the amount,

by which the value of the property on
the execution of the development scheme,
estimated as if the property were clear of
buildings exceeds the value of the
property
prior
to
such
execution,
estimated in like manner."

24. Section 36 of the Act, 1973
provides for assessment of the betterment
charges by the development authority
after opportunity to the person concerned.

25. Section 38-A of the Act, 1973
confers a power upon the authority to levy
the land use conversion charges and the city
development
charges
which
reads
as
follows:-

"38-A. Power of Authority to levy
land use conversion charge and city
development charge:-(1) Where in any
development area, the land use of a
particular land is changed as a result of
amendment of Master Plan or Zonal
Development Plan under Section 13, the
Authority shall be entitled to levy land
use conversion charge on the owner of
such land and in such manner and at such
rates as may be prescribed:

Provided that the land use conversion
charge shall be recovered from the owner
of land by the Authority prior to final
notification under sub-section (4) of
Section 3 of this Act:

Provided further that where the land
use of a particular land is changed as a
result of coming into operation of Master
Plan or Zonal Development Plan, no land
use conversion charge shall be levied
upon the owner of such land.
1 All] Smt. Rekha Rani Vs. State of U.P. and Ors.
77

(2) Where in any development area a
license has been granted to private
developer for assembly and development
of land, the Authority shall be entitled to
levy city development charge on the
private developer of such land and in such
manner and at such rates as may be
prescribed."

26. Section 39-A of the Act, 1973
provides for toll for amenities and Section
39-C of the Act, 1973 provides for levy of
licence fee on the licence to be granted to
the private developers.

27. Section 41 of the Act, 1973
confers
a
power
upon
the
State
Government to issue directions to the
authority and the Chairman and ViceChairman for efficient administration of
the Act as well as to exercise of its
powers and discharge of its functions by
the authority.

28. Section 55 of Act, 1973 confers
a power upon the State Government to
make rules for carrying out the purposes
of the Act by notification in the official
gazette and Section 55 (3) mandates that
the rules so framed shall be laid before
each House of the State Legislature within
the period specified therein.

29. Section 55 of the Act, 1973
reads as follows:-

"55. Power to make rules.- (1) The State
Government may, by notification in the
Gazette, make rules for carrying out the
purposes of this Act.

(2)
In
particular,
and
without
prejudice to the generality of the force
going power, such rules may provide for
all or any of the following matters,
namely-

(a) the levy of fee on a memorandum
of appeal under Sub-section (5) of Section
15 or under Sub-section (2) of Section 27)

(b) the procedure to be followed by
the [Chairman] in the determination of
betterment charge, and the powers that it
shall have for that purpose;

(c ) any other matter which has to be,
or may be, prescribed by rules.

(3) All rules made under this Act
shall, as soon as may be after they are
made, be laid before each House of the
State Legislature, while it is in session,
for a total period of not less than thirty
days, extending in its one session, or more
than one successive session, and shall,
unless some later date is appointed, take
effect from the date of their publication in
the Gazette, subject to such modifications
or annulment as the two Houses of the
Legislature may, during the said period,
agree to make, so, however, that any such
modification or annulment shall be
without prejudice to the validity of
anything previously done thereunder."

30. Section 56 of the Act, 1973 confers
the power to make regulations with the
approval of the State Government upon the
authority and Section 57 of the Act, 1973
provides for framing of the bye-laws by the
authority for the purpose of carrying out the
provisions of the Act with the approval of the
State Government.

31. From the simple reading of the
aforesaid
statutory
provisions
it
is
apparently clear that the basic purpose for
constituting a development authority and
for
declaring
any
area
to
be
a
development area under the Act, 1973, is
to ensure that the development in the area
takes place according to the plan, and not
otherwise. The purpose is to have a
78 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
planned development. The object of the
development authority, as provided for
under Section 7, is to hold and manage
the land to carry on the Engineering and
other managing activities and further to
execute works in connection with the
supply of water and electricity, to dispose
of sewage and to provide other services
and amenities and to do everything which
is necessary or expedient for the purposes
of such development and for purposes
incidental thereto.

32. It is therefore clear that the
purpose of the development authority is
not only to sanction maps in the matter of
raising of constructions but also to ensure
that necessary works are carried out in the
development area in connection with
supply of water, electricity, disposal of
sewage,
and
maintenance
of
other
services and amenities which would
include amenities like provisions for
school, medical help, open areas parks
which are all essential for a pollution free
environment for the residents of the
development area and for basic amenities
of life being made available to them.

33. In the aforesaid background
Section 8 contemplates preparation of a
master plan for the development area.
Sub-section (2) specifically provides that
each development area has to be divided
into
zones
for
the
purposes
of
development and to the manner in which
the land in each zone is proposed to be
used and the stages by which such
development shall be carried out. It is to
serve as the basic pattern of framework
within which the zonal development plan
of various zones may be prepared.

34. From Section 8 itself it is clear
that the master plan is to be framed as a
platform for the purposes of carrying out
the development work in the various
zones and for preparation of the zonal
development plans. The stages in which
such development is to be carried out is
also to be necessarily indicated in the
master plan in order to ensure that the
development as provided for is done in
accordance with the basic pattern as
disclosed in the master plan.

35.

Section
9
contemplates
preparation of the zonal development
plans. These zonal development plans
have to be prepared simultaneously with
the preparation of the master plan or as
soon as may be possible, subsequent to
the preparation of the master plan. These
zonal plans have to provide for a site plan
and use-plan for the development of the
zone. It has to depict approximate
locations and extents of land use proposed
in the zone for such things as public
buildings, public works and utilities,
roads, sewage, drains, business areas,
markets, schools, hospitals, public and
private open spaces and other categories
of public and private uses.

36. The standards of population and
building density are also to be depicted in
the zonal plans. Clause (d) provides for
the matters which must necessarily be
provided for in a zonal plan and these
have been stated in sub clauses (i) to (xii)
which have already been quoted above.

37. In the affidavit filed by the
Principal Secretary, Housing and Urban
Planning
dated
04.12.2013
vide
paragraphs no. 10 and 11 he has disclosed
the role and function of development
authorities.

38. For ready reference paragraphs
no. 10 and 11 are quoted herein below :
1 All] Smt. Rekha Rani Vs. State of U.P. and Ors.
79

"10. That keeping in view the various
provisions of the Act, the role and
functions of the development authorities
may be classified into following four
categories :

(1) Urban Planning Function : it
includes 3 levels of planning :-

(a) Master Plans,

(b) Zonal Development Plans,

(c) Sub-division/Layout Plans.

(2)
Development
Function:
it
includes following activities:

(a) Land acquisition,

(b) Infrastructure development,

(c) Execution of housing and other
schemes.

(3)
Regulatory
Function
:
it
comprises of following regulations :-

(a)
Enforcement
of
zoning
regulations through land use permissions,

(b)
Development
control
or
enforcement of Building Bye- laws
through
grant
of
development
and
building permit by way of plan approval,

(c) Architectural Control,

(d)
Compounding
and
Regularization.

(4)
Facilitator
Role
:
The
development
authority
facilitates
following sectors for promoting and
securing planned development of the
development area :-

(a) Private Sector (both organized as
well as individuals),

(b) Cooperative Sector,

(c) Public-Private-Partnerships,

(d) Public interface : Authority is
also responsible for implementation of the
Citizen Charter, redressal of public
grievances
and
dissemination
of
information, Government Policies and
Guidelines, etc. for the use of public.

11. That as per the prevailing
approach and methodology, there are
three levels of Urban Planning :-

(1) Master Plan,

(2) Zonal Development Plan,

(3) Sub-division/Layout Plan.

A brief description of these 3 stages
is as follows :-

(1) Master Plan :- It is long-term (1520 years) land use plan for the planned
development of the city prepared under
section-8, 10 and 11 of the Act. It
provides comprehensive proposals for
socio-economic development and spatial
development indicating the manner in
which the use of land and development
therein shall be carried out by the
Authority and other related agencies.
Thus, master plan is a design for the
physical,
social
and
economic
development of the city, and also to
improve the quality of life as well.

(2) Zonal Development Plan :- It is a
detailed plan for a zone prepared within
the framework of master plan under
section 9, 10 and 11 of the Act containing
proposals for zone level land uses, roads
and streets, parks and open spaces,
community facilities, services and public
utilities, etc.

(3) Sub Division plan or Layout Plan
:- It is a micro land use plan showing subdivision of any land or portion thereof
into more than one parcel for the purposes
of sale or otherwise. Sub-division plan
may be for a new area or for such land
which is reclaimed after clearance of
existing development especially in old
build up or blighted areas of the city."

39. He has tried to explain the
meaning of the expression 'Stages by
which such development shall be carried
out' as contained in Section 8(2)(a) of the
Act to suggest that various master plans
which are prepared from time to time
reflect the stages by which development
80 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
has been effected. We have serious doubts
with regard to the interpretation so placed.

40. However, it has been admitted in
the affidavit filed on 04.12.2013 that as
on date only 03 zonal plans from various
development authorities throughout the
State have been received and approved by
the State Government.

41. We may record that the State
Government
and
the
Development
Authorities through-out the State of Uttar
Pradesh have made a mockery of the very
purpose
of
planned
development
as
conceived by Sections 8 and 9 of the 1973
Act. The indifferent attitude of the State
Government and Development Authorities
towards
planned
development
as
contemplated under the Act with the
preparation of the master plan and zonal
plans is reflected from one simple fact
which is admitted on record namely that till
date i.e. even after 40 years of the passing of
the Act, 1973, only three zonal plans have
been prepared and approved by the State
Government, in the entire state of Uttar
Pradesh one of which is for a part of the
Zone B within the territorial limits of the
Allahabad Development Authority and two
in respect of the territorial limits of the Agra
Development Authority.

42. It was conceived by the State
Legislature under Section 9 of the Act
that the zonal plan shall be prepared
simultaneously with the master plan or as
soon as may be thereafter. But the words
'simultaneously' and 'as soon as may be
thereafter' occurring in Section 9 of the
Act, 1973, have been stretched by the
Development Authorities and the State
government to mean as "at whatever point
of time State/ the Development Authority
may so desire". As till date the
Development Authorities in the State of
Uttar Pradesh and the State Government
have not been able to understand the
meaning
of
the
simple
words
'simultaneously' and 'as soon as may be'.
Therefore, they have not proceeded to
prepare zonal plans for the entire
development area within the territorial
jurisdiction of the development authority
for last forty years.

43. In our opinion, unless the zonal
plans are prepared and approved, the very
purpose
of
establishment
of
the
development authorities is frustrated. The
zonal plan as noticed above are required
to provide for various instructions in
respect of any particular parcel of land
being reserved for a particular purpose
and further the notification of the areas
which are to be left for public utilities like
parks, private open spaces, hospital,
school etc.

44. This Court made a pointed query
as to what development had exactly been
done by the Allahabad Development
Authority in terms of the zonal plan
prepared for the part of Zone B and
produced before this Court being zonal
plan B-4. The only information supplied
to this Court is that certain roads and road
crossings have been beautified by the
A.D.A. Counsel for the petitioner disputes
the correctness and submits that even
these developments have been done from
the funds provided for the Magh Mela.
We may only record that the work of
beautification so carried out by the
A.D.A. has not been so disclosed in the
Zonal Plan-4 prepared for the city of
Allahabad. As a matter of fact absolutely
nothing could be demonstrated to have
been done by the Development Authority,
so as to establish that any development
1 All] Smt. Rekha Rani Vs. State of U.P. and Ors.
81
work has been carried out in terms of the
zonal plan B-4 prepared by it.

45. We have no hesitation to record
that the State and the Development
Authorities have read the provisions of
the Development act to mean only
sanctioning of maps for constructions and
as a source for collection of money under
various heads. There has been little or no
concern for the planned development as is
contemplated to be done in the light of
Sections 8 and 9 of the Act by preparation
of the zonal plans.

46. We are further surprised by the
manner in which the Secretary of the
Urban Planning and Development has
responded to the order passed by this
Court in the present proceedings.

47. The Chief Standing Counsel on
behalf of the Secretary submitted that Mr.
Sadakant,
Secretary
of
the
Urban
Planning and Development has assumed
charge of the office of the Secretary
Housing and Urban Planning only in
April, 2013 and therefore the period of
nine months is too short to comply with
the statutory provisions and therefore the
zonal plans could not be prepared. What
has been done by the earlier Secretaries
who had been working in the same
department for last forty years has not
been disclosed and as to why the State
Government
and
the
Development
Authorities did not frame the zonal plans,
is not known.

48. If there had existed a provision
in the Act for initiation of action against
the Officers who do not perform their
duties as contemplated, under the Act,
1973 this Court would have directed
action against them. We are constrained
to direct the Chief Secretary of the State
to take action against the concerned
Secretaries of the concerned department
and the various Vice-Chairmen of the
Development Authorities, who for last
forty years did not have time to
understand and to prepare the zonal plans
as contemplated under the said Act. It is
high time for the officers being made
accountable and for not being permitted to
go scott free merely on the plea that they
had assumed the office only nine months
earlier etc.

49. Public and development work
cannot be made to suffer because of the
uncaring attitude of the persons, who hold
office of responsibility under the Act,
1973. Responsibility must necessarily be
fastened upon the officers who have
violated the provisions of the Act with
impunity and in complete disregard to the
very purpose for which the Act, 1973 had
been passed by the legislature.

50. The Chief Secretary shall make a
detailed enquiry and shall take all suitable
action as may be warranted, within four
months from the date a certified copy is
filed before him, both in the matter of
fixing
the
accountability
for
nonpreparation of the zonal plans during
these 40 years, as also for ensuring that
the zonal plans are prepared for each of
the development areas under various
development authorities through out the
state.

51. We leave the issue at this stage
with the hope that the Chief Secretary of
the State shall act keeping in mind that it
is in the larger interest of the public that
deliberate violation of the provisions of
the Act is not perpetuated by the officers
responsible.
82 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES

52. Now turning to the issue
pertaining to the challenge made in these
writ petitions qua the various fees
demanded by the development authorities
while
granting
permission
to
raise
constructions under Section 14 of the Act,
1973.

53. At the outset, we may record that
a Division Bench of this Court in the case of
Sabia Khan & Another vs. Allahabad
Development Authority & Another passed
in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 23281 of
2001, had allowed the writ petition filed for
challenging the legality and validity of the
levy of water charges, malba charges, subdivision charges, development charges and
open space charges, vide judgement and
order dated 1st July, 2003. Not being
satisfied,
the
Allahabad
Development
Authority preferred an special leave to
appeal before the Apex Court, which was
converted into Civil Appeal No. 4351 of
2004. The Apex Court vide judgement
dated 11th July, 2006 reported in (2006) 6
SCC
699
(Allahabad
Development
Authority & Another vs. Sabia Khan &
Another), set aside the order of the High
Court and remanded the matter for decision
afresh on the ground of non-impleadment of
State of Utter Pradesh as a party in the writ
petition and other technical grounds.
However, it was clarified in the said
judgement that the Apex Court has not
applied its mind to the rival contentions of
the parties and all the contentions of the
parties were left open to be considered by
the High Court on remand.

54.