Additional FSI or TDR must match the area of amenity constructed; executive circulars cannot cut down the statutory entitlement.

The statutory scheme under the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 and the Development Control Regulations for Greater Bombay, 1991 created two distinct entitlements: FSI or TDR for surrender of reserved land, and further additional FSI or TDR where the owner develops or constructs the amenity on that land at his own cost. Appendix VII, paragraph 6 measured that additional entitlement by the area of the construction or development done, not by its value or cost. A municipal circular could not override or dilute this quantified statutory right. The restriction of additional TDR to 15% of the road area was therefore unlawful, and the entitlement remained equivalent to the area of the road constructed by the landowners.

---

---

Issues: Whether additional Floor Space Index or Transferable Development Rights for construction of a development plan road on surrendered land had to be granted in an amount equivalent to the area of construction, and whether a municipal circular could restrict that entitlement to 15% of the road area.

Analysis: The statutory scheme under the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 and the Development Control Regulations for Greater Bombay, 1991 provided two distinct entitlements: one for surrender of the reserved land and another for development or construction of the amenity on that land at the owner's cost. Section 126(1)(b) contemplated grant of FSI or TDR against the surrendered land and further additional FSI or TDR against the development or construction of the amenity. Appendix VII, paragraph 6 expressly stated that, when the owner develops or constructs the amenity and hands it over free of cost, he may be granted a further DR in the form of FSI equivalent to the area of the construction or development done by him. The language of the provision fixed the measure by area, not by value, and left no room for a graded valuation scheme based on the nature or cost of different amenities. A municipal circular, being merely an executive instruction, could not override, dilute, or reframe the statutory entitlement created by the Act and the Regulations.

Conclusion: The restriction of additional TDR to 15% of the road area was unlawful, and the landowners were entitled to additional FSI or TDR equivalent to the area of the road constructed by them.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a statute and delegated regulations confer a quantified entitlement measured by the area of the amenity constructed, the entitlement cannot be reduced by an executive circular or redefined on the basis of cost or value.

---