- (1.) Petitioner's contention is that Kanpur Development Authority has wrongly imposed external development fee without rendering any service and without framing any Bye-laws or Rules. We have already held in our earlier judgment that such fee cannot be levied without rendering any service but before making any reference, we quote hereunder the relevant paragraphs of instant writ petition i. e. paragraphs 35 and 36: "35. That it is further relevant to mention here that the land over which the petitioner Company is developing its Colony as per the layout plan is situated on an existing road known as Bithoor Road. There already exists a water drain over the said road for last 100 years. The layout plan of the petitioner Company was approved on grant of No-Objection-Certificate by Kanpur Jal Sansthan, Kanpur, according to which, the petitioner Company has to make arrangement for water supply of its own. There is a further condition that additional charges will be payable to the Jal Sansthan for water sewage disposal. A true copy of the NoObjection-Certificate granted by Kanpur Jal Sansthan is being filed herewith and marked as Annexure -14 to the instant writ petition. Similarly, as regards electric supply the entire costs is to be borne by it. The petitioner Company has to supply land of its own for construction of Sub Station of 33/11 KVA and has to bear costs to be incurred in this regard. Copy of No Objection Certificate granted by the Kanpur Electric Supply Company in this regard dated 15.1.2009 and 29.1.2009 are being filed herewith and marked as Annexure -15 to the instant writ petition. Consequently, the K. D. A. will not to have incur any amount for construction of road, drain, sewer line, electric supply and water supply lines. 36. That the petitioner has been advised to state that the external development charges being compensatory in nature can not be levied, unless there is quid pro quo. Since, the petitioner's land is already situate in a fully developed area and all additional expenses with regard to construction of drain, sewer line, electric supply and water supply lines are to be borne by the petitioner andconsequently, imposition of any sum as external development fee is a result of illegal and arbitrary use of power. "
(2.) The respondents have not given any reply in connection thereto. Against this background, we are relying upon our own judgment dated 4th February, 2010 passed in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 48415 of 2007, Pradeep Kumar Garg v. State of U. P. and others and also an other judgment of this Court reported in (Dr. Umesh Chandra Maheshwari v. Mathura/Vrindavan Development Authority and another, 2010 81 AllLR 317). We also find an other Division Bench judgment of this Court reported in (Virendra Kumar Tyagi v. Ghaziabad Development Authority and others, 2006 62 AllLR 106) taking similar view. Therefore, we are of the considered view that the imposition of external development fee is illegal, hence, the order impugned dated 25th February, 2008 passed by the authority stands quashed.
(3.) Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed, however, no order is passed as to costs. Petition allowed.;