HC: Developer who accepted NMRDA terms for layout approval cannot contest infrastructure charge

Nagpur, October 31: The Nagpur bench of the Bombay High Court has held that a developer who accepts the authority's conditions for layout approval, signs the agreement and deposits the fixed amount cannot later challenge the infrastructure charge.

A bench of Justice Anil S. Kilor and Justice Rajnish R. Vyas delivered the ruling. The case concerns the development of land at Mauja Lava in Nagpur district, on which the Nagpur Metropolitan Region Development Authority (NMRDA) had levied an infrastructure charge. The court dismissed the petition challenging it.

The petition was filed by Sandeep Dwellers Private Limited and members of the Agrawal family. They said a part of their land was earlier reserved for affordable housing, but the reservation was later removed. They argued that NMRDA should therefore not recover the infrastructure cost on that land.

NMRDA opposed the petition. It said the land falls in the R-4 residential zone and that the infrastructure charge must be paid under the applicable development rules.

During the hearing, the High Court noted that the petitioners had accepted the authority's conditions to obtain layout approval. They signed the agreement for payment of the infrastructure cost and also deposited the fixed amount. Only after that did they receive approval for the project.

The court said that having taken the benefit of the agreement, the petitioners could not challenge its terms. It added that the petitioners produced no evidence to show the agreement was obtained through fraud or coercion.

The High Court also explained that an infrastructure charge is levied in areas under development to provide basic amenities. The authority spends the money on facilities such as roads, water supply, electricity and drainage.

The court held that recovering such a charge is proper under the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act (MRTP Act) and the applicable development rules. It found no substantial ground in the petition and dismissed it.

Advocate Kartik Shukla, along with Raghav Bhandarkar, argued for the petitioners. Additional Government Pleader (AGP) T.H. Khan appeared for the state government and Advocate Girish Kunte for NMRDA.