Residential land-use restrictions bar commercial activity unless the Master Plan and regulations are validly amended.

Premises earmarked for residential use under a Master Plan could not lawfully be used for banking, nursing home or other commercial activity, because residential use was limited to habitation and incidental uses and the lease and deed conditions reinforced that restriction. The Development Authority had no power to permit mixed use or change of user by executive decision, administrative convenience or notice; any alteration required compliance with the prescribed statutory procedure and valid amendment of the plan or regulations. Notices and cancellation orders stopping misuse were therefore justified, subject to limited relief allowing doctors, lawyers and architects to use part of the ground floor for clinics or offices on lawful terms.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether banking, nursing home or other commercial activity could be carried on in premises earmarked for residential use under the Master Plan and the applicable regulations; (ii) Whether the Development Authority had power to permit mixed use or change of user without amending the Master Plan and regulations in accordance with law; (iii) Whether the impugned notices, cancellation orders and directions issued for stopping misuse were valid.

Issue (i): Whether banking, nursing home or other commercial activity could be carried on in premises earmarked for residential use under the Master Plan and the applicable regulations.

Analysis: The statutory scheme required the Development Authority to prepare and enforce a development plan identifying the use of land for residential, commercial, industrial or other specified purposes. The regulations defined residential use as use for human habitation and incidental uses only, and commercial or institutional use was separately defined. The lease and transfer deeds also restricted the premises to residential use. Banking activity and running of nursing homes on a commercial scale were held to be inconsistent with the residential character of the sector and contrary to the binding plan, regulations and deed conditions.

Conclusion: Such commercial use in a residential sector was impermissible.

Issue (ii): Whether the Development Authority had power to permit mixed use or change of user without amending the Master Plan and regulations in accordance with law.

Analysis: The Development Authority could act only within the limits of the Act, the regulations and the Master Plan. Any alteration in land use required the prescribed statutory procedure, including amendment of the relevant plan or regulations where permissible. An executive decision, proposal, public notice or administrative convenience could not override the statutory land-use regime. The authority had no discretion to sanction a different use in violation of the notified plan.

Conclusion: The Development Authority had no such power unless the plan and regulations were validly amended.

Issue (iii): Whether the impugned notices, cancellation orders and directions issued for stopping misuse were valid.

Analysis: Since the use of residential plots for banking and other commercial activities was unauthorized, the authority was justified in proceeding against the misuse under the lease conditions and the Act. The Court, however, directed a limited accommodation only for doctors, lawyers and architects to use 30 per cent of the ground floor area for their clinics or offices, with charges to be determined in accordance with law after hearing.

Conclusion: The action against misuse was upheld, subject to the limited relief granted for professional use by doctors, lawyers and architects.

Final Conclusion: The appeals failed on the main issue of unauthorized commercial use in residential sectors, and the statutory land-use regime was affirmed as binding and enforceable. The judgment also directed cessation of misuse, shifting to appropriate sectors where applicable, and limited professional use within the residential premises as specifically stated.

Ratio Decidendi: Land earmarked for residential use cannot be diverted to banking, nursing home or commercial use except by a valid statutory amendment of the Master Plan or regulations following the prescribed procedure.

---