Uttar Pradesh
,
Gomti Nagar
,
Lucknow
Published : 12 July, 2014   |   Last updated - 24 Jun, 2024
Allottees Complain Against LDA For Delayed Possessions in Parijat Apartments
Reported by
Aashish Deep
Legal Review by
Anmol Gupta
Updated by
Anupa Kujur
406
Households affected
1949
People Affected
2011
Year started
Land area affected
406
Households affected
1949
People Affected
2011
Year started
Land area affected
Key Insights
Sector
Infrastructure
Reason/Cause of conflict
Township/Real Estate
Conflict Status
Ongoing
Ended
Legal Status
Region Classification
Urban
Ended
1
Summary

Parijat Apartments is a lavish township proposed by Lucknow Development Authority (LDA) in Gomti Nagar with flats as big as 2,400 square feet. When LDA commenced the project it promised the allottees to deliver the plots by 2015, but the project got stuck in a conflict between the authority and farmers from whom it had acquired land for the township.
In 2016, LDA resolved the conflict with farmers after it paid higher compensation to the farmers. The construction work started and LDA planned to deliver all the plots in the next two to three months. But a new conflict had arisen between the allottees and LDA. Allottees complained that they had to pay high EMIs for the plots that they got possession over, after three years of delay.
Allottees filed complaints with the Consumer forum. In 2019 UP deputy CM Keshav Maurya wrote to CM Yogi Adityanath about irregularities in the allotment of commercial plots, apartment construction, forgery in amalgamation of schemes and disappearance of documents and files in the LDA. Decisions were taken that benefited private builders and companies found guilty of irregularities in the construction of Parijat, Panchsheel, Smriti, Srishti and Sahaj apartments were not blacklisted and instead even given more work, Maurya alleged. He said that files of scores of persons who had been allotted plots/flats in the Transport Nagar, Gomti Nagar and Jankipuram colonies were missing from the LDA.

2
Fact Sheet

Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

No items found.

Other Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Demanding possession of houses

Region Classification

Urban

Type of Land

Private

What was the action taken by the police?

How many people did the police detain or arrest?

What is the current status of the detained/accused persons?

Did the person face any violence while in police custody?

If any arrests took place, were the accused persons produced before a judge within 24 hours of the arrest?

If the accused was not produced before a magistrate within 24 hours, or not produced at all, what were the reasons?

Legislation under which the accused was charged

Was the accused person informed of their right to legal representation? Did the accused person have access to legal aid?

In cases where the accused person approached the court for bail, was bail granted?

Why was bail granted or rejected? If granted, what were the bail conditions and quantum of bail?

Were there any other notable irregularities that took place, or other significant details?

Details of sources (names of accused, names and numbers of any lawyers, names of any police officers contacted)

Status of Project

Original Project Deadline

Whether the Project has been Delayed

Significance of Land to Land Owners/Users

Agricultural land

Whether the project was stalled due to land conflict

Source/Reference

Total investment involved (in Crores):

Type of investment:

Year of Estimation

Page Number In Investment Document:

Has the Conflict Ended?

Yes

When did it end?

12 September 2014

Why did the conflict end?

Court decision in favour of community

The High Court passed an order in favour of the petitioners and directed that the Lucknow Development Authority allot the same plot to the petitioner. If it is not available, then they must allot any other plot of same size and on the same cost in any other scheme.

Author
Reported by
Aashish Deep

Uttar Pradesh

Kumar Sambhav is a social entrepreneur and award-winning journalist, leading innovative research in accountability investigations. He is the founder of Land Conflict Watch and is currently working as India Research Lead with Princeton University’s Digital Witness Lab.

Read More

Latest updates
Arunachal Pradesh
Arunachal Pradesh

Hydroelectric projects on Subansiri river continue despite public outcry, disasters, and persistent floods

Gujarat
Gujarat

Farmers divided over Mandal-Becharaji Special Investment region in Gujarat

Gujarat
Gujarat

Farmers protest against GIDC in Gujarat, demand promised jobs, compensation

Goa
Goa

Proposed construction in Goa village blocks residents' access to agricultural fields, river

Assam
Assam

Violence erupts in Dhemaji amid ongoing Assam-Arunachal border dispute

Odisha
Odisha

Odisha's Dungripali village protests Aditya Birla solar power project

Assam
Assam

Illegal coal mining continues to thrive in Assam's Tinsukia

Assam
Assam

5 Cops Killed, 60 Civilians Injured in Firing between Assam, Mizoram Police

Fact sheet

Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

No items found.

Allottees Complain Against LDA For Delayed Possessions in Parijat Apartments

Reported by

Aashish Deep

Legal Review by

Edited by

Updated by

Updated by

Published on

June 18, 2017

July 29, 2024

Edited on

June 18, 2017

Sector

Infrastructure

Reason or Cause of Conflict

Township/Real Estate

Starting Year

2011

Land Area Affected (in Hectares)

ha

Households Affected by Conflict

406

People Affected by Conflict

1949

State

Uttar Pradesh

Sector

Infrastructure

People Affected by Conflict

1949

Households Affected by Conflict

406

Land Area Affected (in Hectares)

ha

Starting Year

2011

Location of Conflict

Gomti Nagar

Lucknow

Reason or Cause of Conflict

Township/Real Estate

Land Conflict Summary

Parijat Apartments is a lavish township proposed by Lucknow Development Authority (LDA) in Gomti Nagar with flats as big as 2,400 square feet. When LDA commenced the project it promised the allottees to deliver the plots by 2015, but the project got stuck in a conflict between the authority and farmers from whom it had acquired land for the township.
In 2016, LDA resolved the conflict with farmers after it paid higher compensation to the farmers. The construction work started and LDA planned to deliver all the plots in the next two to three months. But a new conflict had arisen between the allottees and LDA. Allottees complained that they had to pay high EMIs for the plots that they got possession over, after three years of delay.
Allottees filed complaints with the Consumer forum. In 2019 UP deputy CM Keshav Maurya wrote to CM Yogi Adityanath about irregularities in the allotment of commercial plots, apartment construction, forgery in amalgamation of schemes and disappearance of documents and files in the LDA. Decisions were taken that benefited private builders and companies found guilty of irregularities in the construction of Parijat, Panchsheel, Smriti, Srishti and Sahaj apartments were not blacklisted and instead even given more work, Maurya alleged. He said that files of scores of persons who had been allotted plots/flats in the Transport Nagar, Gomti Nagar and Jankipuram colonies were missing from the LDA.

Fact Sheet

Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

No items found.

Other Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Demanding possession of houses

Region Classification

Urban

Type of Land

Private

Type of Common Land

What was the action taken by the police?

How many people did the police detain or arrest?

What is the current status of the detained/accused persons?

Did the person face any violence while in police custody?

Did the person face any violence while in police custody?

If any arrests took place, were the accused persons produced before a judge within 24 hours of the arrest?

If the accused was not produced before a magistrate within 24 hours, or not produced at all, what were the reasons?

Legislation under which the accused was charged

Was the accused person informed of their right to legal representation? Did the accused person have access to legal aid?

In cases where the accused person approached the court for bail, was bail granted?

Why was bail granted or rejected? If granted, what were the bail conditions and quantum of bail?

Were there any other notable irregularities that took place, or other significant details?

Details of sources (names of accused, names and numbers of any lawyers, names of any police officers contacted)

Status of Project

Original Project Deadline

Whether the Project has been Delayed

Significance of Land to Land Owners/Users

Agricultural land

Whether the project was stalled due to land conflict

Source/Reference

Total investment involved (in Crores):

Type of investment:

Year of Estimation

Page Number In Investment Document:

Has the Conflict Ended?

Yes

When did it end?

12 September 2014

Why did the conflict end?

Court decision in favour of community

The High Court passed an order in favour of the petitioners and directed that the Lucknow Development Authority allot the same plot to the petitioner. If it is not available, then they must allot any other plot of same size and on the same cost in any other scheme.

Legal Data

Categories of Legislations Involved in the Conflict

Land Acquisition Laws, Constitutional Law

Legislations/Policies Involved

Uttar Pradesh Urban Planning and Development Act, 1973
Section 17 [For farmer-promoter conflict: Compulsory acquisition of land by State Government]
Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016
Section 11(4)(a) [Promoter’s responsibility for all obligations made to the allottees as per the agreement for sale till the conveyance of all the apartments to the allottee]; Section 18 [Return of amount and compensation if promoter fails to complete the project or hand over possession]; Section 19(2) [Right of allottee to know stage-wise time schedule of completion of apartment]; Section 19(3) [Right of allottee to claim refund if the promoter is unable to give possession of the apartment in accordance with the terms of agreement for sale]; Section 61 [Penalty on any promoter for contravention of any provisions of RERA, other than section 3 or section 4]
Uttar Pradesh Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Rules, 2016
Rule 15 [Rate of interest payable by the promoter and the allottee]
Constitution of India, 1950
Article 14 [for unjust enrichment by promoters]
  1. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

  2. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

  3. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

  4. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

  5. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

  6. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

  7. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

Whether claims/objections were made as per procedure in the relevant statute

What was the claim(s)/objection(s) raised by the community?

What was the Decision of the Concerned Government Department?

Legal Processes and Loopholes Enabling the Conflict:

Lack of legal protection over land rights

Legal Status:

In Court

Status of Case In Court

Disposed

Whether any adjudicatory body was approached

Name of the adjudicatory body

Name(s) of the Court(s)

Allahabad High Court (Lucknow Bench)

Case Number

MISC. BENCH No. - 3606 of 2012

Main Reasoning/Decision of court

The petitioners claimed that since they were not given the allotted plots by the Lucknow Development Authority, there has been unjust enrichment of the amount deposited and this is an exercise of arbitrary power under Article 14 of the Constitution of India, 1950. The High Court agreed with the petitioners and rejected the contention of the respondents that they are entitled to charge higher cost due to escalation of price. The Court directed that the Lucknow Development Authority allot the same plot to the petitioner but if it is not available, then they must allot any other plot of same size and on the same cost in any other scheme.

Major Human Rights Violations Related to the Conflict:

No items found.

Reported Details of the Violation:

Date of Violation

Location of Violation

Additional Information

Nature of Protest

Complaints/petitions/letters/memorandums to officials

Government Departments Involved in the Conflict:

Lucknow Development Authority

PSUs Involved in the Conflict:

Did LCW Approach Government Authorities for Comments?

Name, Designation and Comment of the Government Authorities Approached

Corporate Parties Involved in the Conflict:

Did LCW Approach Corporate Parties for Comments?

Communities/Local Organisations in the Conflict:

Allottees of Parijat Apartments

Complaints/petitions/letters/memorandums to officials

Information on the use of criminal law

What was the action taken by the police?

How many people did the police detain or arrest?

What is the current status of the detained/accused persons?

Did the person face any violence while in police custody?

If any arrests took place, were the accused persons produced before a judge within 24 hours of the arrest?

If the accused was not produced before a magistrate within 24 hours, or not produced at all, what were the reasons?

Legislation under which the accused was charged

Was the accused person informed of their right to legal representation? Did the accused person have access to legal aid?

In cases where the accused person approached the court for bail, was bail granted?

Why was bail granted or rejected? If granted, what were the bail conditions and quantum of bail?

Were there any other notable irregularities that took place, or other significant details?

Resources

Resources Related to Conflict

  • News Articles Related to the Conflict:
  • Documents Related to the Conflict:
  • Links Related to the Conflict:

Images

Image Credit:  

Image Credit:  

Video

Other Land Conflicts in Uttar Pradesh

cross
    Not a member yet?
    Sign up now