Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, M/s. M.P. Homes, filed a writ petition challenging an order dated 11.11.2020 passed by the State of Maharashtra (Respondent No.1) directing the petitioner to deposit 100% of the Ready Reckoner valuation for regularisation of change of user to non-agricultural purpose and 75% of the Ready Reckoner valuation for conveyance as transfer premium. The petitioner had applied for regularisation under a previous policy that prescribed different rates. The court heard arguments from Mr. Drupad Patil for the petitioner, Mrs. V.S. Nimbalkar for the State, and Mr. Saurabh Railkar for Respondent No.5. The court held that the premium must be calculated based on the policy in force at the time of the application, not subsequent higher rates, as the petitioner had a legitimate expectation that the earlier policy would apply. The impugned order was quashed and set aside, and the State was directed to process the application in accordance with the policy prevailing at the time of the application.
Headnote
A) Land Law - Regularisation of Change of User - Ready Reckoner Valuation - The State directed the petitioner to deposit 100% of Ready Reckoner valuation for regularisation of change of user to non-agricultural purpose and 75% for conveyance as transfer premium. The court held that the premium must be calculated based on the policy in force at the time of the application, not subsequent higher rates, as the petitioner had a legitimate expectation that the earlier policy would apply. (Paras 2-5) B) Administrative Law - Legitimate Expectation - Policy Change - The court applied the principle that when an application is made under a particular policy, the applicant is entitled to have it processed under that policy unless there is a clear statutory change. The State's demand for higher rates based on a later policy was quashed. (Paras 3-5)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the State can demand 100% of Ready Reckoner valuation for regularisation of change of user and 75% for conveyance as transfer premium when the petitioner had applied under a previous policy that prescribed different rates.
Final Decision
The impugned order dated 11.11.2020 is quashed and set aside. The State is directed to process the petitioner's application in accordance with the policy prevailing at the time of the application.
Law Points
- Regularisation of change of user
- Ready Reckoner valuation
- Conveyance premium
- Policy in force at time of application
- Legitimate expectation
