- (1.) THIS is writ petition filed by a Housing Society, known as Jan Sankalp Sahkari Avas Samiti Ltd. , Agra. The petition has been filed to claim certain reliefs from the Agra Development Authority, Agra, respondent No. 1 (A. D. A ). The Secretary, Agra Development Authority, has been arrayed as respondent No. 2. The reliefs as sought are that the Court issue a writ of mandamus directing respondent No. l, A. D. A. to release the mortgaged plots of the petitioner held as security for internal development and the cash security of Rs. 8, 13, 354/- or its propor tionate 90 per cent to the petitioner and, further, not to realise any amount towards the compounding charges in excess of the sum of Rs. 17, 500/- already deposited by the petitioner and as demanded by the order dated 2. 12. 1992 of the A. D, A.
(2.) THE issues between the petitioner and the A. D. A are in reference to com pounding charges, in effect, on the lay-out plan of the colony and the individual plotes as have been development. As the petitioners is a housing society, the conten tion of the A. D. A is that there have been errors in the layout plan. Secondly, there have been 54 violations by the member con stituents of the housing society inasmuch as of the set-backs to the left on the plots so allotted to the members have been violated. In arguments the petitioners on the other hand contends that, firstly, as the layout plan was sanctioned in 1990, the question of any violation by the housing society does not arise. Secondly insofar as the violation of the set-backs by the owners of the plot are con cerned, this individual violation cannot be settled by adjusting and realising the amount as penalty from the cash security of the housing society. No writ of certiorari has been sought by the petitioner to quash any order which may be suffering from an error apparent on the face of the record or a manifest error or for that matter an order being without juris diction. It is not the contention of the petitioner that respondents did not have the authority for the action which they have taken. The issues raised in this writ petition spring from a misunderstanding on the con cept of urban planning both as an obligation to provide for public housing, which a colony is, as well as construction of houses on individually owned plots.
(3.) IT is not unknown that in the politics to provide for public housing the State com promises with laws which govern urban development and violates the standards of conforming uses of land. Individuals in their temptation to increase their occupation of property rights, which could not vest other wise violate and build on set-backs which the law requires to be left open. Unless the concept of compounding is understood the issues as raised in this writ petition cannot be sorted out. The Court will take up the two is sues one by one.;