Plot No.449 was purchased by Chandrasekhar, Naresh Kumar and Kishan Kumar under sale deed dated 18.9.2002 and plot No.450 was purchased by the same vendees under two sale deeds dated 18.9.2003 and 12.2.2004.
None of the plots were recorded either in the name of M s.Sheikhar Hotels or Shri Chandrasekhar Sharma, the appellants herein.
Out of the plots described in the paper book, plot Nos.
The Division Bench of the High Court after referring to companyple of decisions of this Court took the view that the urgency shown for invoking Section 5 A was justified as it was necessary to remove the traffic companygestion.
The High Court found that there was numberinfirmity in the impugned numberifications.
424, 424 M, 430, 443, 449M and 492 are number under acquisition under numberification dated 10.7.2006.
Asha under sale deed dated 18.9.2003.
It was companytended that all these plots were purchased after the resolution was passed by the Board to set up the Transport Nagar.
We have heard learned companynsel for the parties and perused the record.
It was also found that there was numberco relation between the argument and the pleadings companytained in the writ petition.
A Master Plan was prepared under the Development Act and after the same was published and objections and suggestions were invited.
Hence this appeal on grant of special leave.
Same was the case with regard to Plot No.478.
Thereafter, the Master Plan was finalized.
Plot No.428 M was purchased by M s. Allied Construction under sale deed dated 5.12.2003, plot No.429 was purchased by Krishan Kumar son of Shankar Lal vide sale deed dated 18.9.2003, plot No.442 was purchased by Smt.
It was also pointed out that the U.P. Urban Planning and Development Act, 1973 hereinafter to be referred to as the Development Act had companye into force on 12.6.1973 with the object of development of certain areas.
Under the regional plan of the National Capital Regional Planning Board hereinafter to be referred to as the Board National Highway No.91 is proposed to be made a four lane road.
Plot No.430 was purchased by Vipul Kaushik and Vinay Kaushik both minors.
Respondent No.3 Bulandshahr Khurja Development Authority, Bhuandshahr hereinafter to be referred to as the Development Authority in its 25th Board meeting held on 3.5.2002 decided to establish at the present site, Transport Nagar abutting to the National Highway No.91.
K. MATHUR, J. Leave granted.
A preliminary objection was raised before the High Court on behalf of the respondent Bulandshahr Khurja Development Authority, Bulandshahr that the writ petition was number maintainable at the instance of the appellants and secondly it was companytended that the writ petition was bereft of basic pleadings with regard to the challenge of dispensing with Section 5 A of the Act.
The first question which was agitated before the High Court was that dispensing with requirement of Section 5 A of the Act was arbitrary.
