HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - C No. - 35240 of 2025 Court No. - 29 HON'BLE MAHESH CHANDRA TRIPATHI, J. HON'BLE KUNAL RAVI SINGH, J. 1. Heard Sri Sankalp Narain, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Fuzail Ahmad Ansari, learned Standing Counsel for the State respondents. 2. The instant writ petition is preferred assailing the validity of the impugned order dated 09.09.2025 passed by the Special Officer (World Bank Project), Kanpur Development Authority, Kanpur (respondent no. 3), whereby non-construction charges to the tune of Rs. 3,49,58,819/- has been levied upon the petitioner-society with a further direction to deposit the said amount so that further action can be taken in the matter as per the rules. 3. The brief facts of the present case are that there exists a society in the name and style of 'Kanyakubj Education Trust, Kanpur Nagar, which was registered on 19.06.1961 and renewal of registration took place on 19.10.2020 w.e.f. 10.10.2020 for a period of five years. In the year 2014, an agreement was executed between the petitioner-society and Kanpur Development Authority, Kanpur (in short 'KDA'), wherein KDA agreed upon to transfer some land for constructing a building for the school and also agreed upon to allot Plot No. S-1, Sector-E Scheme Barra K.U.D.P., measuring 9120.6- sq. meters to the petitioner-society and the land was to be utilized only for the education purpose within two years from the date of agreement. An amount of Rs. 2,56,83,609.60 was to be paid by the petitioner-society with regard to the cost of the land. The plot in question was allotted on 20.08.2019 thereafter the petitioner-society applied for sanction of map and requisite amount was paid on 05.06.2023. Thereafter necessary NOC was obtained Fire Department and on 14.06.2023 the Building Section also granted its NOC. Thereafter due to Covid-19 the development work could not be undertaken as no map was sanctioned by the KDA. Thereafter several applications were filed by the petitioner no. 2 for sanction of map and grant of NOC qua construction of the school Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Sankalp Narain, Srivats Narain Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Yash Padia Committee Of Management The Kanyakubj Education Trust And Another .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 2 Others .....Respondent(s) building but without sanctioning the map and granting NOC, the respondent Authority has passed the order impugned, hence this writ petition. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner precisely submitted that while passing the order impugned certain non-development charges have been levied upon the petitioner without according any opportunity to the petitioner, therefore, the order impugned is in violation of principles of natural justice and is liable to be set aside. In support of his contention, learned counsel for the petitioners has placed reliance upon recital in paragraph nos. 19 and 20 of the writ petition. 5. Sri Yash Padia, learned counsel for Kanpur Development Authority vehemently opposed the writ petition and submits that actual physical possession was handed over to the society way back on 20.08.2019. 6. So far as merit is concerned, we are not inclined to adjudicate the matter at this stage, as from the order impugned itself reflects that opportunity has not been provided to the petitioners and as such the order is hit by the principles of natural justice. 7. In A.K. Kraipak and others Vs. Union of India and Others, reported in (1970) 1 SCR 457, Hon'ble Supreme Court held that the concept of natural justice has undergone a great deal of change in recent years. In the past it was thought that it included just two rules namely (i) no one shall be a Judge in his own cause (nemo dabet esse judex propria causa) and (ii) no decision shall be given against a party without affording him a reasonable hearing (audi alteram partem). Very soon thereafter a third rule was envisaged and that is that quasi-judicial enquiries must be held in good faith, without bias and not arbitrarily or unreasonably. But in the course of years many more subsidiary rules came to be added to the rules of natural justice." 8. Accordingly, we relegate the matter to the competent authority, i.e. Vice-Chairman (respondent no.2) with a direction to decide the matter afresh, in light of the observation made above, strictly in accordance with law expeditious, preferably, within a period of six weeks from the date of production of a certified copy of this order, but certainly the impugned demand shall be subject to the final outcome of the proceedings to be decided by the Vice-Chairman. 9. With the aforesaid observation, the writ petition is disposed of. October 14, 2025 Pkb/ WRIC No. 35240 of 2025 2 (Kunal Ravi Singh,J.) (Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.) Digitally signed by :- PRAMOD KUMAR BAJPAI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad