✦ Allahabad High Court · 27 Jul 2023

Umesh Kumar v. State Of U.P. Thru Secy & Ors.

WRIT - C No. 70235 of 2011SIDDHARTHA VARMA, MANO2 min read

Case at a glance

Order date
27 Jul 2023
Bench
SIDDHARTHA VARMA, MANO
Neutral citation
2023:AHC:152125-DB

Outcome

Disposed of

Therefore, the present writ petition is disposed of in terms of

Key paragraphs

  • Para 66. Therefore, the present writ petition is disposed of in terms of the order passed in Writ C No.24761 of 2003 (Smt. Chan Muni Vs. The Allahabad Development Authority And Others) decided on 13.07.2023.

Judgment

Petitioner :- Umesh Kumar Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru Secy. And Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Arvind Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Abhay Kumar Dwivedi, Ashish Kumar Srivastava, Dhananjay Awasthi Hon'ble Siddhartha Varma,J. Hon'ble Manoj Bajaj,J.

1.

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2.

Through present writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the demand notice dated 26.11.2011 which was issued to him by Gorakhpur Development Authority at the time of sanctioning the map submitted by the petitioner.

3.

The aforesaid demand notice issued by the Gorakhpur Development Authority demanded various fees including stacking fee, sub-division charge, development charge, inspection fee etc.

4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has challenged the aforesaid demand notice on the ground that only those charges/fees can be demanded by the Development Authority which are referable to Section 15(2-A) of the U.P. Urban Planning and Development Act, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as "Act, 1973"). Learned counsel for the petitioner, therefore, submits that only those charges/fees can be levied at the time of sanctioning the map by the Development Authority for which the Act, 1973 authorises the Development Authority and the State Government in exercise of power u/s 41 of the Act, 1973 cannot authorise/permit the Development Authority to levy charges/fees which are not mentioned in the Act, 1973. Section 15(2-A) of the Act, 1973 is being quoted as below:- "15(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. "

5.

The controversy of the present case is squarely covered by the judgement of this Court passed in Writ C No.24761 of 2003 (Smt. Chan Muni Vs. The Allahabad Development Authority And Others) decided on 13.07.2023.

Operative part

6.

Therefore, the present writ petition is disposed of in terms of the order passed in Writ C No.24761 of 2003 (Smt. Chan Muni Vs. The Allahabad Development Authority And Others) decided on 13.07.2023.

7.

It is made clear that all the benefits of the judgement passed in Writ C No.24761 of 2003 (Smt. Chan Muni Vs. The Allahabad Development Authority And Others) decided on 13.07.2023 will be available to the petitioner of the present petition. Order Date :- 27.7.2023 PK (Manoj Bajaj,J.) (Siddhartha Varma,J.) PRAVEEN KUMAR PRAVEEN KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Questions this judgment answers

What did the Court decide in this case?

The Court recorded the following disposition: Therefore, the present writ petition is disposed of in terms of

Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?

U.P. Urban Planning and Development Act, 1973.

Which court decided this case, and when?

Allahabad High Court, on 27 Jul 2023. The bench was SIDDHARTHA VARMA, MANO.

Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case

No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.

This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.

Why is this linked?

This is the original judgment text, reproduced from the public court record. Always verify it against the official record before relying on it in a filing — check it on Allahabad High Court or eCourts case status (search case no. WRIT - C No. 70235 of 2011). ← Search more judgments