2025 (9) TMI 1061

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....respondent and Shri Kaushalendra Nath Singh, learned counsel for New Okhla Industrial Development Authority (in short "Authority"). 2. The instant writ petition has been preferred for following reliefs:- "(a) Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction, quashing and/ or setting aside the impugned Resolution bearing no.218/8 passed by the Respondent No.2 in its 218th Board Meeting held on 12.06.2025; (b) Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction quashing and/ or setting aside the impugned Letter bearing no.NOIDA/ Commerce/ 2025/ 1072 dated 27.05.2025 issued by the respondent no.2; (c) Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction declaring that "Change in Shareholder"/ "Change in Constitution" charges are ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... (f) In the alternative, issue an order waiving "Change in Shareholding"/ "Change in Constitution" charges for the transactions contemplated under Schedule 2 of the approved Resolution Plan in accordance with Clause 16 (F) (b) r/w Clause 17 (G) (b) of the Unified Policy (2025);..." 3. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner has contended that the impugned letter dated 27.05.2025 and impugned resolution dated 12.06.2025 have been issued/ passed by the respondent no.2-Authority levying "Change in Shareholder" (CIS)/ "Change in Constitution" (CIC) charge of Rs. 67,15,13,866/- (plus GST) on the petitioner in relation to the implementation of the Resolution Plan of Boulevard Projects Pvt. Ltd. (BPPL) approved under Section 31 o....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....mpleting the construction of and handing over units to all the genuine allottees of the 'Delhi-One' project as per the terms of the original allotment; (b) Paying a sum of Rs. 613 crores (approx.) to Authority (being 78% of its claim considered under the Resolution Plan) for past dues and defaults of the erstwhile management/ promoters of BPPL. Notably, the said amount is far higher than the original Rs. 325 crores payout contemplated under the approved Resolution Plan; (c) Paying 41% of the admitted claims of secured financial creditors (comprising of banks and NBFCs); (d) Paying future lease rentals and premiums to Authority in terms of the existing Lease Deed." 6. Subsequently, appeals were filed by ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....,28,315   Total 6,13,18,34,520 7. It is contended that in pursuance of the settlement terms, the Authority's Board was to take a decision on the petitioner's representation of inapplicability of CIS/ CIC charges in relation to the implementation of the Resolution Plan. However, since no decision was taken by Authority's Board, the petitioner was constrained to file Writ Petition No.8500 of 2025 in which the Court vide order dated 7.4.2025 directed the Board of Authority to take decision on the petitioner's representation within four weeks. However, the Authority vide impugned letter dated 27.05.2025 and impugned resolution dated 12.06.2025 has taken a decision to levy exorbitant CIC/ CIS charges on the petit....