Statutory planning control prevails over lease FSI clauses, and promissory estoppel cannot compel action contrary to law.

A contractual floor space index clause could not override the sanctioned development plan under the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966. The agreed FSI acquired legal effect only when it conformed to the statutory planning framework and any modification was approved in the manner prescribed by Sections 31 and 37, with final sanctity attaching only after approval under Section 159 as part of the development plan. Any alteration without prior State sanction remained inconsistent with the statute, so the higher FSI in the lease was not legally enforceable. Promissory estoppel also could not be invoked to require a public authority to act contrary to statute or beyond its powers.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appellant could enforce the higher floor space index stipulated in the lease agreement despite the sanctioned development plan and the later governmental notification, and whether the doctrine of promissory estoppel could be invoked against the public authority to compel an act contrary to the statute.

Analysis: The agreed floor space index could acquire legal efficacy only if it conformed to the development plan sanctioned under the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 and any modification approved in the manner prescribed by Sections 31 and 37. The fixation of floor space index, though initiated by the planning authority, derived legal sanctity only after approval under Section 159 and became binding as part of the final development plan. Any alteration without prior sanction of the State Government was contrary to the statutory scheme. On that footing, the higher floor space index inserted in the agreement did not create a legally enforceable right. The doctrine of promissory estoppel could not be used to compel a public body to act in breach of statute or beyond its authority.

Conclusion: The appellant could not enforce the contractual stipulation as against the sanctioned statutory regime, and the plea of promissory estoppel failed.

---