सहारा शहर मामले में नगर निगम लखनऊ को मिली कानूनी जीत, हाईकोर्ट ने सुनाया फैसला – allahabad high court lucknow municipal corporation action sahara ntc amkr
Lucknow Municipal Corporation has got a big relief in the Sahara city case spread over about 170 acres. In this long-running dispute, the Lucknow bench of the Allahabad High Court has rejected the writ petition filed by Sahara Commercial. This decision of the court has legitimized the action of the Municipal Corporation and strengthened its stand and strengthened the credibility of the city administration.
Let us tell you that Sahara city located in Gomtinagar was taken over by the Municipal Corporation on the charges of violation of lease conditions. The Municipal Corporation said that the conditions set under the lease signed in 1994 were not followed, and violations of many construction and usage rules were found. After investigation, the Municipal Corporation took action and sealed 6 gates of the entire complex and took administrative control into its hands.
Sahara Group had approached the High Court challenging this action and termed it as arbitrary and contrary to procedure. However, the Municipal Corporation clarified in the court that the action was taken completely as per the rules. The corporation also said that the company was given an opportunity to improve by issuing notices several times in the years 2020 and 2025, but final action was taken only when the rules were not followed.
During the hearing, the court considered the arguments of both the parties and found that the action taken by the Municipal Corporation was as per the rules. On this basis the court rejected Sahara’s petition. This decision is being considered a major legal victory for the Municipal Corporation, because it has become clear that the action taken to conserve public land and resources has passed the judicial test.
In this entire matter, it also came to light that due to expiry of the lease period on the concerned land and violation of the conditions, the Municipal Corporation had to intervene. Even after the expiry of the lease period of 30 years, the scheduled development works were not carried out, due to which the administration had to take strict measures.
—- End —-
