The Supreme Court has held that a Change of Land Use (CLU) granted for setting up a cement grinding unit in a rural agricultural zone was illegal, and that a subsequent approval by the Planning Board could not cure the defect.
The bench of Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Sandeep Mehta set aside both the CLU dated 13.12.2021 and the Punjab and Haryana High Court judgment which had upheld it.
The case arose from appeals filed by local agriculturists and a school against the State of Punjab and Shree Cement North Private Limited. The land in question, measuring approximately 47.82 acres in Sangrur, had been purchased for establishing a cement-related industrial unit. The appellants contended that the land fell within a rural agricultural zone under the operative Master Plan and that a red-category polluting industry was not permissible in that zone under the Punjab Regional and Town Planning and Development Act, 1995 (PRTPD Act).
The Punjab and Haryana High Court had dismissed the writ petitions challenging the CLU, observing that although the CLU initially lacked statutory backing, the Punjab Regional and Town Planning and Development Board granted approval in its 43rd meeting dated 05.01.2022. The High Court treated this approval as curing the defect and validating the land use.
The Supreme Court disagreed. It held that once a Master Plan comes into operation under the PRTPD Act, it acquires statutory force and binds both authorities and private parties. Land use and development must strictly conform to the zoning prescriptions contained in the Plan. A CLU cannot be used as a mechanism to override or bypass the Master Plan. If a particular industrial activity is not permissible in a notified zone, the only lawful course is to amend or revise the Master Plan in accordance with the statutory procedure, which includes public notice, invitation of objections, consideration of suggestions, and publication in the Official Gazette.
Relying on earlier precedents such as K. Ramadas Shenoy v. Town Municipal Council, Udipi and Bangalore Medical Trust v. B.S. Muddappa, the Court reiterated that statutory development plans are not mere administrative guidelines. They represent a legislative balance of competing land uses and cannot be diluted by ad hoc executive decisions.
Addressing the High Court’s reasoning, the Supreme Court held that a post-facto approval recorded in the minutes of a Board meeting cannot operate as a statutory amendment to the Master Plan. The PRTPD Act prescribes a specific procedure for alteration or revision of the Plan, and that procedure must be strictly followed. A permission that was unlawful on the date of its grant cannot be retrospectively validated unless the statute expressly provides for such validation, which the PRTPD Act does not.
The Court further examined environmental and siting safeguards applicable to cement grinding units. It noted the preventive character of the environmental clearance regime under the EIA Notification, 2006 and the importance of siting norms prescribed by the Punjab Pollution Control Board, particularly in view of the proximity of residential habitations and an educational institution. Preventive safeguards, the Court observed, cannot be diluted on the assumption that compliance can be ensured at a later stage.
Rejecting arguments based on industrial development and investment made pursuant to the CLU, the Court held that financial expenditure or administrative facilitation cannot legitimise an action that is contrary to statutory planning norms. The legality of a permission must be tested on the date of its issuance.
Allowing the appeals, the Supreme Court set aside the High Court’s judgment, quashed the CLU dated 13.12.2021, and also set aside the consequential consent to establish granted from the pollution angle, insofar as it was based on the impugned CLU.
Case Details
Case Title: Harbinder Singh Sekhon & Ors. Versus The State Of Punjab & Ors.
Case No.: SLP(C) NO.8316 OF 2024
Date: 13/02/2026
Read More: 18% GST On EVA Gloves, Sterile Aprons, OT Shoe Covers, Ultrasound Probe Covers: AAR
