TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2001 (5) TMI 989
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the rights created in favour of the petitioner under the Master Plan for the Dayalbagh Regulated Area reserved for the petitioner and further the Hon'ble Court may quash the plans wrongfully sanctioned by the A.D.A. by issuing a writ in the nature of certiorari . (C) to issue a writ of mandamus commanding the controlling authority of Dayalbagh Regulated Area to act in accordance with law with the provision of U. P. R.B.O. Act and to take steps to preserve the integrity of the Master Plan of the Dayalbagh Regulated Area. 2. The short question involved in this writ petition is as to whether the Plot Nos. 340, 341 and 348 which are in dispute after its exclusion from the Dayalbagh Town Area continued to be part of Dayalbagh Regulated Area, hence governed by the Master Plan of Dayalbagh Development Area or after its exclusion from the Dayalbagh Town Area, it reverted back to Agra Regulated Area and, therefore, will be governed by its Master Plan, and further as to whether the petitioner has any legal right over the plots in question only on the basis of land use shown in the Master Plan as University. 3. It appears that the Dayalbagh Town Area was created vide Notification und....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....bers but the notification describes the area of Dayalbagh Regulated Area of that area falling within the limits of Dayalbagh Town Area. In other words, the boundaries and areas of Dayalbagh Town Area would be the area to be regulated area under the R.B.O. Act. Thereafter, the Dayalbagh Regulated Area prepared a Master Plan under Section 5 (a) of the R.B.O. Act in the year 1982, a copy whereof has been annexed as Annexure-26 to the counter-affidavit of respondent No. 5. Clause 2 of the aforesaid Master Plan provides that it has been prepared keeping in view the pace of development of ten years and thus. It would be in operation till the year 1992. The plan does not envisage the development activity beyond the period of ten years. However, it appears that though the plan was prepared in the year 1982, but it was approved by the State Government on 13.2.1992. The aforesaid Master Plan (Annexure-26) also mentions as "Dayalbagh Master Plan, 1982-92". Similarly, the Agra Development Authority also prepared its Master Plan on 11.7.1974 which was approved vide Notification dated 11.7.1975 specifying therein that it will remain in force from 1975 to 2001. The plot Nos. 340, 341 an....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... The thrust of the submission is that the inclusion of these plots within the limits of Agra Development Area requires fresh notification under Section 3 and since no such notification has been issued, these plots were never restored back to the Agra Development Authority and remained within the limits of Oayalbagh Regulated Area. He also argued that the Master Plan prepared by the Dayalbagh Regulated Area in 1982 was a draft Master Plan which attained finality only after the approval of the State Government dated 3.2.1992 and as such it will remain operative for a period of ten years with effect from 3.2.1992. He also referred sub-section (6) of Section 59 of the U. P. Urban Planning and Development Act, 1973, (hereinafter referred to as the Act of 1973), and submitted that it saves the things done or action taken, and schemes made under the R.B.O. Act will continue to be in force so far as they are not inconsistent with the provisions of this Act, and as such the use of plots in question shown in the Master Plan of the Dayalbagh Development Area as University cannot be changed. 6. On the other hand, Sri S.P. Gupta, learned senior counsel appearing for respondent No. 5, submitte....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ct was enacted for providing better sanitation, lighting and improvement of Town Areas within the State, whereas R.B.O. Act was enacted to check and control the tendency of haphazard building construction round about growing towns without there being any proper civic amenities such as proper drainage, water supply, communication, sanitation and to prevent bad laying out of land, haphazard erection of buildings or growth of sub-standard colony outside the urban areas. Similarly, the U. P. Urban Planning and Development Act. 1973 was enacted to provide for development of certain areas of the State of U. P. according to plan and for the matters ancillary thereto. Therefore, the object and purpose of all the three Acts is very much akin and close to each other, to ensure proper and planned growth of the area maintaining ecological balance and to provide better civic amenities to the people. Thus, there is no inconsistency and provisions of these Acts may apply at different situations. 9. Section 17 of the R.B.O. Act provides as under : "17. Effect of provisions of the Act inconsistent with other laws.--The provisions of this Act shall have effect notwithstanding, anything incon....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lots continue to be amenable to the Jurisdiction of Dayalbagh Regulated Area despite re-fixation of the boundaries under the Town Areas Act in the absence of notification under Section 3 of the Urban Planning Act declaring these plots as development area, can also not be accepted for the reason that these plots were originally part of Agra Development Authority and was included in the Development Area under the notification dated 11.9.1974 issued under Section 3 of the Urban Planning Act. Admittedly, the Master Plan of Agra Development Authority was finalized and published in July, 1975 and, therefore, after its exclusion from Dayalbagh Regulated Area, no further notification for its inclusion in the Agra Development Authority is required to be issued, because after exclusion. It automatically reverted back to its original position and formed part of Agra Development Authority. Admittedly, in the Master Plan of Agra Development Authority, which was finalized in the year 1975 and will remain in force till 2001, these plots have been shown therein and their user has been shown as school. Therefore, the contention that after deletion from Dayalbagh Regulated Area, a notification ought....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ird does not affect the second. In other words, where a reference to or a citation of one Statute in another is made by incorporation which in effect means bodily lifting of the provisions of one enactment and making it part of another, in that event the repeal of the former leaves the latter Statute wholly untouched. But where it has not been bodily lifted and has been borrowed by reference only, in that case the subsequent amendment in the Statute will also have to be deemed to have been incorporated in the borrowing Act. Reference may be made to para 27 of the Judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Bajya v. Gopikabai [1978] 3 SCR 561 , which is as under : "27. Broadly speaking, legislation by referential incorporation falls in two categories.--First, where a Statute by specific reference incorporates the provisions of another Statute as of the time of adoption. Second, where a Statute incorporates by general reference the law concerning a particular subject, as a genus. In the case of the former, the subsequent amendments made in the referred Statute cannot automatically be read into the adopting Statute. In the case of latter category, it may be presumed th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o be made applicable. In this case any modification, repeal or enactment of the earlier Statute will also be carried into in the later, for here, the idea is that certain provisions of an earlier Statute which become applicable in certain circumstances are to be made use of for the purpose of the later Act also. Examples of this type of legislation are to be seen in Collector of Customs v. Nathella Sampathu Chetty 1983 ECR 2198 D(SC) ; New Central Jute Mills Co. Ltd. v. Assistant Collector 1978 (2) ELT 393(SC) and Special Land Acquisition Officer v. City Improvement Trust (1977) 1 SCR 569. Whether a particular Statute falls into the first or second category is always a question of construction. In the present case, in my view, the legislation falls into the second category. Section 3 (3) of the 1957 Act does not Incorporate into the 1957 Act any specific provisions of the 1944 Act. It only declares generally that the provisions of the 1944 Act shall apply "so far as may be", that is, to the extent necessary and practical, for the purposes of the 1957 Act as well. 50. That apart, it has been held, even when a specific provision is incorporated and the case apparently fal....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... preparation of Master Plan for the regulated area. It reads as under : "(1) if in the opinion of the State Government any regulated area requires to be developed according to a Master Plan it may cause such a plan to be prepared either through the Controlling Authority or through such other agency as it may think fit. (2) A Master Plan shall be revised at the end of every ten years, and may be revised earlier if the State Government so think fit." 22. The Master Plan prepared under Section 5A is to be revised at the end of every 10 years or may be earlier if the State Government thinks proper and fit. Section 6 of the R.B.O. Act provides that no person shall undertake or carry out the development of any site within the regulated area or erect, re-erect or make any material change in any building or extend any excavation or lay out any means of access to road except in accordance with the regulations issued under the R.B.O. Act and with previous permission of the Prescribed Authority in writing. Section 7 of the R.B.O. Act provides about the procedure of making such application seeking permission in respect of the development, building excavation or by means of acces....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ate Government till 1992. From the perusal of the Master Plan, it appears that it has been prepared keeping in view the development activities upto 1992 only. It has not taken into account the developmental activities beyond 1992 and it is this draft plan which has been approved by the State Government. This also finds support from the letter of the State Government directing the development authority to prepare another Master Plan. Thus, it would be difficult to hold that the Master Plan for 1982-1992 is operative till 2002 inspite of the fact that the plan itself provides that it has been prepared for the period upto 1992 only. 25. The Master Plan describes the omnibus plan of a city or town keeping in view the impact of environmental factors. It mentions the land use falling within the Master Plan. It does not refer the ownership of the land. It only lays down that the land which has been brought within the Master Plan is to be used in the same manner and purpose as has been shown in the Master Plan so that the regulated area may be developed in accordance with the Master Plan otherwise the very object and purpose of the Act and of the Master Plan will be defeated. Therefore, a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y of the Dayalbagh Town Area. Consequently, the State Government issued notification dated 12.8.1993 (Annexure-8 to the petition) and re-determined the limit and boundary of the Dayalbagh Town Area. A perusal of the said notification shows that plot Nos. 340, 341 and 348 alongwith other plots were excised out from the area of Dayalbagh Town Area. It also appears that the controlling authority of Dayalbagh Regulated Area, pursuant to the aforesaid notification of the State Government, resolved in its meeting dated 20.9.1993 that the land taken out from Dayalbagh Town Area may be developed by the Agra Development Authority. The office of the Associate Town and Country Planner of the Urban and Rural Planning Department of U. P. vide letter dated 19.3.1998 (Annexure-C.A. 28 to the counter-affidavit of respondent No. 5) asked the Agra Development Authority to develop the land in accordance with the Master Plan prepared for the Agra Development Authority, which has been excised out pursuant to the notification dated 12.8,1993. 27. It was faintly urged that on the request of the petitioner, 600 acres of land including these three plots were allocated for establishing the University where....