Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Macrotech Developers Limited, a developer, filed a writ petition seeking a declaration that it is entitled to a 50% concession on the premium payable for development of a property owned by respondent no. 3, Money Magnum Nest Private Limited, under a rebate scheme introduced by the Government of Maharashtra via Government Resolution dated 14.01.2021. The scheme provided concessions, including a 50% rebate on premium, for projects where the premium was pending as on 31.03.2020, to mitigate the impact of Covid-19. The petitioner had entered into a development agreement with respondent no. 3 and obtained a Commencement Certificate on 10.03.2020, but the premium for additional FSI under Regulation 35(1)(a)(iii) of the Development Control Regulations was not paid. The petitioner applied for the concession, but the State Government rejected it via communication dated 08.02.2023, stating that the scheme applied only to projects where the Commencement Certificate was obtained after 31.03.2020. The court examined the plain language of the Government Resolution and found no such restriction. It held that the scheme applied to all projects where premium was pending as on 31.03.2020, regardless of the date of Commencement Certificate. The court also noted that the petitioner had a legitimate expectation to receive the concession. Consequently, the court quashed the communication dated 08.02.2023 and directed the respondents to grant the 50% concession on the premium payable by the petitioner.
Headnote
A) Government Policy - Covid-19 Rebate Scheme - Interpretation of Government Resolution - The petitioner, a developer, sought 50% concession on premium under a Government Resolution dated 14.01.2021 which provided concessions for projects where premium was pending as on 31.03.2020. The court held that the scheme applied to all projects where premium was not paid, regardless of when the Commencement Certificate was obtained, as the plain language of the resolution did not restrict eligibility based on the date of Commencement Certificate. (Paras 1-10)
B) Development Control Regulations - Premium Concession - Regulation 35(1)(a)(iii) - The court interpreted Regulation 35(1)(a)(iii) of the Development Control Regulations, which provides for premium payment, in conjunction with the rebate scheme. It held that the concession was available to the petitioner as the premium was pending and the scheme was intended to provide relief during the Covid-19 period. (Paras 11-15)
C) Administrative Law - Legitimate Expectation - The court applied the principle of legitimate expectation, holding that the petitioner had a legitimate expectation to receive the concession based on the clear terms of the Government Resolution, and the rejection by the State was arbitrary. (Paras 16-20)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the petitioner, a developer, is entitled to 50% concession on premium payable for development of the subject property under the Government Resolution dated 14.01.2021, despite having obtained a Commencement Certificate prior to the cut-off date, when the premium was not paid and remained pending.
Final Decision
The court allowed the petition, quashed the communication dated 08.02.2023, and directed the respondents to grant the 50% concession on the premium payable by the petitioner for development of the subject property under Regulation 35(1)(a)(iii) in accordance with the Government Resolution dated 14.01.2021.
Law Points
- Interpretation of Government Resolution
- Covid-19 rebate scheme
- premium concession
- development rights
- pending premium
- Regulation 35(1)(a)(iii) of DCR
- promissory estoppel
- legitimate expectation
Case Details
2023 LawText (BOM) (10) 103
WRIT PETITION (L) NO. 7389 OF 2023
SUNIL B. SHUKRE, FIRDOSHP. POONIWALLA
Mr. Nikhil Sakhardande, Senior Advocate with Mr. Yogendra Singh I.by Jeet Gandhi, for the petitioner; Mr. Atul Damle, Senior Advocate with Mr. Among Singh with Mr. Rohan Arora with Mr. K.K. Kode I.by Vashi and Vashi, for respondent no. 3; Mr. Milind More for respondent/State
Macrotech Developers Limited
State of Maharashtra, Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai, Money Magnum Nest Private Limited
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition seeking declaration and quashing of communication regarding denial of premium concession under Covid-19 rebate scheme.
Remedy Sought
Declaration that petitioner is entitled to 50% concession on premium payable for development of subject property under Regulation 35(1)(a)(iii) in view of Government Resolution dated 14.01.2021, and quashing of communication dated 08.02.2023 rejecting the representation.
Filing Reason
The State Government rejected the petitioner's application for 50% concession on premium under the rebate scheme, claiming the scheme applied only to projects where Commencement Certificate was obtained after 31.03.2020.
Issues
Whether the petitioner is entitled to 50% concession on premium under the Government Resolution dated 14.01.2021 despite having obtained a Commencement Certificate prior to 31.03.2020?
Whether the communication dated 08.02.2023 rejecting the petitioner's representation is arbitrary and liable to be quashed?
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner argued that the plain language of the Government Resolution does not restrict eligibility based on the date of Commencement Certificate; it only requires that premium be pending as on 31.03.2020.
Respondent State argued that the scheme was intended for projects that were yet to commence, and since the petitioner had already obtained a Commencement Certificate, it was not eligible.
Ratio Decidendi
The Government Resolution dated 14.01.2021 providing 50% concession on premium applies to all projects where the premium was pending as on 31.03.2020, irrespective of the date of Commencement Certificate. The plain language of the resolution does not impose any restriction based on the date of Commencement Certificate, and the rejection by the State was arbitrary.
Judgment Excerpts
By this petition, the petitioner, a developer of the property of respondent no.3, speaking for itself and also for respondent no. 3, the owner, is seeking a declaration that it is entitled to 50% concession on premium payable for development of its project in terms of Regulation 35 (1)(a)(iii) in view of a scheme of respondent no. 1 floated under the Government Resolution dated 14.01.2021, giving certain concessions including 50% concession or rebate on the premium payable on the development of property during Covid-19 period.
The petitioner is also seeking quashing of communication dated 08.02.2023 of respondent no. 1 whereby the representation made under the rebate scheme for grant of 50% concession on the premium to be paid by the petitioner for the development of its project on the land bearing CS. No. 1913 of Byculla Division, E Ward situated at Maulana Azad Road, Mahalaxmi, Mumbai, which is owned by respondent no. 3 and which has given all its development rights to the petitioner, was rejected.
Procedural History
The petitioner filed a writ petition before the High Court of Judicature at Bombay on an unspecified date. The petition was heard finally by consent of parties on 17th October 2023, and judgment was pronounced on 23rd October 2023.
Acts & Sections
- Companies Act, 1956:
- Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act, 1888:
- Development Control Regulations: Regulation 35(1)(a)(iii)
