M/S G L R Real Estate Private Limited ... vs Municipal Corporation, Gwalior on 30 September, 2022

[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Madhya Pradesh High Court

M/S G L R Real Estate Private Limited ... vs Municipal Corporation, Gwalior on 30 September, 2022

Bench: Milind Ramesh Phadke

                                  1
             IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                          AT GWALIOR
                               BEFORE
             HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MILIND RAMESH PHADKE
                      ON THE 30th OF SEPTEMBER, 2022

                   WRIT PETITION No. 25329 of 2021

        BETWEEN:-
        M/S G L R REAL ESTATE PRIVATE LIMITED
        GWALIOR THR. AUTHORISED SIGNATORY SHRI
        DEEPAK JAIN S/O LT. SHRI V P JAIN, AGED
        ABOUT 50 YEARS, A-349 ANAND NAGAR
        BAHODAPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                               .....PETITIONER
        (BY SHRI S.K. SHRIVASTAVA - ADVOCATE)

        AND
1.      MUNICIPAL   CORPORATION,               GWALIOR
        COMMISSIONER     NARAYAN               KRISHNA
        SHEJWALKAR   BHAWAN   CITY              CENTER
        (MADHYA PRADESH)

2.      CITY PLANNER MUNICIPAL CORPORATION
        DISTT. GWALIOR (MADHYA PRADESH)

3.      BUILDING       OFFICER      MUNICIPAL
        COR POR ATION DISTT. GWALIOR (MADHYA
        PRADESH)

4.      STATE OF M.P. THR. PRINCIPAL SECRETARY
        DEPARTMENT OF URBAN ADMINISTRATION
        AND     DEVELOPMENT VALLABH BHAWAN
        BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                             .....RESPONDENTS
        (BY SHRI DEEPAK KHOT - GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE )

      This petition coming on for admission this day, th e court passed the
following:
                                   ORDER

The present petition is being preferred by the petitioner against the order dated 10.08.2021(Annexure P/1) and part of permission dated 30.09.2021 2 (Annexure P/2) issued by Commissioner Municipal Corporation, Gwalior, whereby the petitioner has been directed to pay external development charges and even after payment of the said amount on 12.08.2021, he is being compelled to carry out the external development work with a condition that the said external development work would be carried by the petitioner on his own cost.

On the last date of hearing, learned counsel for the Corporation was directed to seek instructions in the matter and file the response positively, for which he today also sought time.

At this juncture, learned counsel for the petitioner placed on record one letter dated 28.09.2022 whereby the condition to carry out external development by the petitioner of its own cost, aggrieved by which the present petition was filed, was waived and it has been mentioned therein that the external development work would be carried by the Corporation, Gwalior itself and only the internal development work is to be carried out by the petitioner.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that since the grievance of the petitioner has been redressed, the present petition as such has become infructuous but a limited prayer has been made that in context of Rule 12 (x) of the Madhya Pradesh Nagar Palika (Registration of Colonizer, Terms and Conditions) Rules, 1998, where there is a condition stipulated that if the external development work is to be carried out by the Municipal Corporation, the Municipal Corporation shall complete the development work within a period of one year from the date of deposit of the amount under clause (v) and shall inform the colonizer accordingly for that the Corporation may be directed.

Per contra, Shri Khot, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents submitted that under Rule 12 (v) of the Madhya Pradesh Nagar 3 Palika (Registration of Colonizer, Terms and Conditions) Rules, 1998 the colonizer is required to carry out internal development work first and if the said work is not completed, then there is a provision for forfeiting the mortgaged plots and in the light of aforementioned provision it is incumbent upon the petitioner to first complete the internal development work then only clause x of Rule 12 of the Madhya Pradesh Nagar Palika (Registration of Colonizer, Terms and Conditions) Rules, 1998 would come into play and Corporation would be required to complete the external work.

After hearing learned counsel for the parties and looking to the controversy which is in a very narrow compass, both the petitioner and the Municipal Corporation are directed to carry out their respective internal and external development works which are assigned to both parties within the time bound frame as prescribed under the Rules of the Madhya Pradesh Nagar Palika (Registration of Colonizer, Terms and Conditions) Rules, 1998.

With the aforesaid direction, the present petition is disposed of.

(MILIND RAMESH PHADKE) JUDGE neetu NEETU Digitally signed by NEETU SHASHANK DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH BENCH GWALIOR, ou=HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH BENCH GWALIOR, postalCode=474001, st=Madhya Pradesh, SHASH 2.5.4.20=36b486bb0d381b950e435ec 09e066bc6b58cb947c1474b7dc349a1 cf27eaa2ce, pseudonym=C09AF52B2B8D28DBCFF 3D4A07CC4C71E915C48FC, ANK serialNumber=E60A9BBFC39E0EE500E AADE1E0B3B8565CB3A7DC9F5CD048 197DF0FF3149AE58, cn=NEETU SHASHANK Date: 2022.09.30 19:03:37 +05'30'

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Madhya Pradesh High Court