Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

1. Rule. Respondent waives service. By consent of parties, rule made returnable forthwith and heard finally.

2. This writ petition has been filed seeking a direction against the Mira Bhayandar Municipal Corporation (the respondent herein) to grant "Transferable Development Rights" (TDR) or a "Development Rights Certificate" (DRC) in respect of an area admeasuring 5349 square meters. This TDR/DRC is claimed by the petitioner on the basis that the petitioner, on the instructions and directions of the respondent-Corporation constructed a separate parking lot building admeasuring 3873.87 square meters (for convenience called the "said constructed amenity" or "constructed amenity") and handed over possession of the same to the respondent-Corporation on 12th January, 2016. According to the petitioner, as per the Deed of Assignment entered into between the petitioner and the respondent-Corporation dated 4th September, 2015 as well as Regulation 33 (6) of the Appendix IV of the Development Control Regulations of the respondent-Corporation, wp-10146-17.docx the petitioner was entitled to TDR for the said constructed amenity, namely, the parking lot building.

5. According to the petitioner this is fortified by the fact that for development of the aforesaid properties, the respondent also, vide their letter bearing No. MBMC/TP/3346/2007-08, granted a Commencement Certificate for construction of buildings on the above mentioned properties. Thereafter, the respondent- Corporation issued a Letter of Intent (LOI) vide order bearing No. MBMC/ TP/3781/09-10 dated 25th January, 2010 wherein the wp-10146-17.docx petitioner was informed that instead of providing a parking lot on the ground floor, the petitioner should provide a separate building for a parking lot (constructed amenity) to the respondent- Corporation as per the Development Control Regulations. Accordingly, as per the Revised Building Plan dated 5th August, 2010 approved by the respondent-Corporation, an area admeasuring 3740 square meters was reserved for parking reservation No. 264-A [i.e. building for parking lot of Ground Floor to 2nd Floor] admeasuring 3873.87 square meters. This was to be surrendered by the petitioner to the respondent-Corporation for amenities purpose. In furtherance of this arrangement, the petitioner started construction of the said parking lot building (constructed amenity) admeasuring 3873.87 square meters. Thereafter, the petitioner and the respondent entered into a Deed of Assignment dated 4th September, 2015 (for short "DOA") which was duly registered. Under this DOA, the petitioner was styled as the "Assignor" and the respondent-Corporation was styled as the "Assignee". The relevant clauses of this DOA read as under:-

10. In this factual backdrop, the learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that it is not in dispute that the petitioner had constructed a separate parking lot building admeasuring 3873.87 square meters and handed over possession of the said building to the respondent-Corporation on 12th January, 2016. The fact that this parking lot building was to be constructed by the petitioner is also clearly recorded in the DOA entered into between the petitioner and the respondent-Corporation on 4th wp-10146-17.docx September, 2015. The learned Advocate submitted that for construction of this parking lot building, the petitioner was entitled to TDR for construction of the said amenity over and above the FSI granted by the respondent-Corporation for taking over the land which formed the portion of the parking lot reservation under Reservation No. 264-A. The learned Advocate submitted that as far as the FSI for the land is concerned, the same has duly been given to the petitioner and which was admeasuring 3310 square meters. However, for construction of the parking lot building (constructed amenity) no TDR/DRC has been issued to the petitioner though he was entitled to the same not only under the DOA dated 4th September, 2015 but also under the Development Control Regulations of the respondent-Corporation. He submitted therefore that there was no justification in refusing to grant the aforesaid TDR and hence the respondent-Corporation be directed to grant the TDR/DRC to the petitioner, as more particularly set out in the petition.

12. The learned Advocate for the respondent-Corporation further submitted that under the Development Control Regulations, the land under reservation can be acquired by the Corporation by payment of consideration in the form of money and/or TDR. Alternatively, if reservation is transferred to the Corporation by the concerned person free of cost, potential of the entire amount is considered for calculation of the buildable area irrespective of development of parking as per the provisions of Table No. 3 (IV) F of Rule 9 of the Development Control Regulations. The learned wp-10146-17.docx Advocate submitted that as per condition No.36 in the commencement certificate, the parking lot had been transferred free of cost and the benefit of calculation of the entire area had already been granted to the petitioner and therefore there was no case for granting any further TDR to the petitioner. In these circumstances, the learned Advocate submitted that there was no merit in the petition and the same ought to be dismissed.