Court rules that developers who accept layout approval conditions and sign an agreement cannot later challenge the infrastructure charges; petition by Sandeep Developers Pvt. Ltd. and the Agrawal family dismissed.
Nagpur, October 31: The Nagpur Bench of the Bombay High Court has dismissed a petition filed by Sandeep Developers Pvt. Ltd. and members of the Agrawal family challenging infrastructure charges imposed by the Nagpur Metropolitan Region Development Authority (NMRDA) for land development at Mouza Lava in Nagpur district.
A Division Bench comprising Justice Anil S. Kilor and Justice Rajnish R. Vyas ruled that developers who accept the conditions imposed for layout approval, enter into an agreement and pay the prescribed charges cannot subsequently challenge those conditions.
What Was the Dispute?
The petitioners had challenged the infrastructure charges levied by NMRDA on their land. They argued that a portion of the land was earlier reserved for affordable housing, but the reservation was subsequently removed. Therefore, they contended that NMRDA could not recover infrastructure costs from the property.
Opposing the petition, NMRDA maintained that the land falls under the R-4 residential zone and is subject to infrastructure charges under the applicable development regulations.
High Court Rejects Developers’ Argument
During the hearing, the court noted that the petitioners had accepted the conditions prescribed by NMRDA for layout approval and had signed an agreement agreeing to pay the infrastructure costs.
The petitioners had also deposited the amount and obtained approval for their project.
The Bench observed that they could not take advantage of the agreement and subsequently challenge its terms. The petitioners had also failed to establish that the agreement was signed under fraud or coercion.
Infrastructure Charges Held Justified
The High Court observed that infrastructure charges are intended to support the development of essential civic amenities in developing areas, including roads, water supply, electricity and drainage facilities.
It held that the charges were justified under the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning (MRTP) Act and applicable development regulations.
Finding no merit in the petition, the court dismissed it.
Lawyers Representing the Parties
Advocate Kartik Shukla, assisted by Raghav Bhandarkar, appeared for the petitioners. Additional Government Pleader (AGP) T.H. Khan represented the State, while Advocate Girish Kunte appeared for NMRDA.
