Authority: Supreme Court of India

Order Date: 27-10-2026

Case Overview

  • Petition for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No. 37043/2026 filed by City Montessori School (CMS) against State of Uttar Pradesh and others, arising from a High Court judgment dated 01‑10‑2026 in WRITC No. 9839/2026.
  • The dispute concerns CMS’s participation in proceedings before the Lucknow Development Authority (LDA) under Section 27 of the U.P. Urban Planning and Development Act, 1973, initiated against the 5th respondent.
  • The High Court had directed CMS to file a detailed response to the LDA notice, submit relevant documents, and allowed an inspection by an officer of rank not less than Chief Engineer/Additional Secretary within four weeks, with the matter to be considered independently and impartially.
  • The LDA issued an order on 21‑10‑2026 in Suit No.2092 of 2025 (Online Case No. LDA/Z6/ANI/2025/0006284) without affording a hearing to CMS, prompting the present Special Leave Petition.
  • Background facts: the 23,000 sq ft. land was owned by Smt. Urmila Bhalla and Smt. Sheela Kapoor; 6,000 sq ft. leased to a predecessor of the 5th respondent, 17,000 sq ft. leased to CMS. Earlier eviction and acquisition proceedings resulted in the acquisition of the full 23,000 sq ft., later partially set aside, leaving 17,000 sq ft. for CMS and 6,000 sq ft. for the other lessee.

Final Outcome

  • The Supreme Court set aside the LDA order dated 21‑10‑2026, directing the Authority to issue fresh notice to both CMS and the 5th respondent, and to serve copies of the 5th respondent’s reply and annexures, as well as any inspection report, on CMS.
  • The notice must specify a hearing date within one month from the order, with personal acknowledgment of attendance; the matter shall be concluded on that date or any adjourned date.
  • The Court clarified that it has not examined the merits of the High Court’s 01‑10‑2026 judgment, intervening only on grounds of violation of natural‑justice principles.
  • The Special Leave Petition stands disposed with these directions, and any pending applications are rejected.

Topics: Court Proceedings, Urban Planning Dispute