#Urban Planning

The Kerala High Court has ruled that public footpaths are inviolable pedestrian spaces protected under Article 21, and that installing commercial kiosks violates both the Street Vending Act and the constitutional right to safe, unobstructed movement. This sets a critical precedent for urban planning across India, empowering citizens to challenge encroachments on public walkways by municipal bodies and development authorities.

Bombay High Court reaffirms that land reservations under Section 127 of the MRTP Act lapse by operation of law if authorities fail to acquire or develop the land within 12 years of a valid purchase notice. Landowners are entitled to de-reservation without being forced to accept Transferable Development Rights (TDR), protecting their property rights against administrative inaction.

Gauhati HC rules that the Guwahati Metropolitan Development Authority (GMDA) holds overriding jurisdiction over Gaon Panchayat areas covered under a notified Master Plan, even if prior permission was granted by the Panchayat. The court clarified that a written reply suffices for natural justice where facts are undisputed, reinforcing municipal authority supremacy in urban planning enforcement.

The Karnataka High Court ruled that a developer who voluntarily surrendered land for a master plan road in exchange for additional Floor Area Ratio (FAR) cannot later challenge the relinquishment deed. The court applied the doctrine of approbate and reprobate, holding that accepting benefits estops the developer from adopting inconsistent positions, ensuring legal consistency in urban planning agreements.

The Supreme Court ruled that an approved Master Plan under the Delhi Development Act overrides deemed forest status claims under the Forest (Conservation) Act, even if tree growth occurred post-acquisition. This binding precedent clarifies that statutory urban development plans take precedence over subsequent environmental classifications, impacting railway land development and urban planning authorities.

The Punjab & Haryana High Court dismissed a petition seeking reclassification of a hotel as a commercial building under the suspended 2025 Rules, ruling that completed constructions must adhere to the regulations under which they were approved. The court held that violations or prospective rule changes cannot retroactively benefit non-compliant buildings, reinforcing strict compliance in urban planning.

Bombay High Court holds that demolition notices under Section 260 MMC Act must detail nature, extent and legal basis of unauthorized construction to satisfy natural justice.

National Green Tribunal holds that failure to produce official maps or records justifies adverse inference, reinforcing accountability in environmental compliance and urban planning enforcement.

Uttarakhand High Court holds that demolition notices cannot be enforced while statutory revision is pending, reinforcing procedural fairness in urban development cases.

Bombay High Court clarifies that land reservation under MRTP Act lapses after 10 years if not acquired, and subsequent revision cannot revive it without fresh justification.

Andhra Pradesh High Court holds that construction without statutory permission under the Panchayat Raj Act is illegal and mandates immediate cessation until proper approval is obtained.

Andhra Pradesh High Court holds that land classified as Brown Zone (Hills) without geographical basis is arbitrary; authorities must rectify such errors in master plans within 12 weeks.