Bombay HC dismisses the order set by appellate authority as the same person rejected the developer’s application for reconstruction
TITLE : S.K Realty v State of Maharashtra
CORAM : Hon’ble Justice Milind N Jadhav
DATE : 2nd January 2024
CITATION : WP No 13458 of 2023
FACTS
The writ petition was filed under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution challenging the order passed by the Appellate authority. The order from the lower authority was that the plots should be treated as separate units to be certified as tenants and grant revised NOC for redevelopment of the property. The order was alleged to have seriously breached the principles of natural justice.
LAWS INVOLVED
The schedule 3 of the MAHADA, 1976 states the scale showing the percentage of built up area to be reserved by the co-operative society for allotment by the board for building reconstructed for residential purposes and commercial purposes
ISSUES
- Whether the order passed by the appellate authority valid?
JUDGEMENT
It was found that the authority who passed the order was the same authority who was the vice president and chief executive officer who has rejected the application proposal for eligibility of the developer. The order was set aside on the ground that the authority had prior interest in the developer property.
The court took cognizance of 3rd schedule of the Maharashtra and Area Development Act, 1976 to review the eligibility of allotment of tenants.
“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”
Written by- Sanjana Ravichandran