https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=459014 Land excluded from the Dayalbagh Town Area was held to revert to the Agra Development Area because the regulated-area boundaries were linked to the Town Area limits and the later exclusion notification operated as supplementary to the earlier regime. The non obstante clause did not preserve Dayalbagh control over plots no longer within the Town Area, and no fresh notification was required for the planning regime to apply. The entry showing University use in the Dayalbagh Master Plan created no enforceable title, possession right, or construction right, since a master plan regulates land use but does not transfer ownership. Promissory estoppel also failed because no clear State promise or detrimental reliance was shown. en-us Fri, 18 May 2001 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 26 Nov 2024 11:59:40 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=459014 Land excluded from the Dayalbagh Town Area was held to revert to the Agra Development Area because the regulated-area boundaries were linked to the Town Area limits and the later exclusion notification operated as supplementary to the earlier regime. The non obstante clause did not preserve Dayalbagh control over plots no longer within the Town Area, and no fresh notification was required for the planning regime to apply. The entry showing University use in the Dayalbagh Master Plan created no enforceable title, possession right, or construction right, since a master plan regulates land use but does not transfer ownership. Promissory estoppel also failed because no clear State promise or detrimental reliance was shown. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 18 May 2001 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=459014