The Supreme Court set aside a 2020 Punjab and Haryana High Court order directing a CBI probe into Ambience Mall land use in Gurugram, calling it legally unsustainable. However, civil proceedings on zoning violations may continue before competent authorities.
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court set aside a 2020 ruling from the Punjab and Haryana High Court, which had ordered the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to investigate the construction of Ambience Mall and nearby commercial structures on land in Gurugram that was initially designated for a group housing project.
A bench consisting of Justices J B Pardiwala and Sandeep Mehta clarified that ongoing court proceedings regarding the disputed land use and statutory violations could still proceed. The Supreme Court determined that the high court’s directive for a criminal investigation was “unsustainable in law,” thereby halting the CBI inquiry.
Additionally, the court put a hold on a separate environmental compensation ruling made by the National Green Tribunal (NGT), which had fined the developer Rs 10 crore for alleged construction activities in green zones. However, the court also allowed for the NGT case to be revived, contingent on the outcomes of the Supreme Court’s judgment.
ALSO READ: Kerala High Court backs Lulu Mall’s right to charge parking fees; appeal dismissed
The dispute involves nearly 19 acres of land in Gurugram’s Nathupur village adjacent to the Delhi-Jaipur National Highway. Originally licensed in the early 1990s for group housing, part of the land was later de-licensed and converted for commercial use, sparking significant backlash from residents and apartment buyers, who claimed misrepresentation and diversion of land intended for recreational areas and community needs.
In 2015, a public interest litigation was filed in the Punjab and Haryana High Court, alleging collusion between the developer and state authorities that facilitated commercial construction in violation of the Haryana Development and Regulation of Urban Areas Act, 1975.
In its judgment from July 2020, the high court had directed a CBI probe into the builder-government nexus, quashed the commercial licenses issued for Ambience Mall and surrounding properties and ruled that the reduction of the housing project area from 18.98 acres to 7.9 acres constituted a breach of norms and buyer agreements.
It noted that mandatory layout plans were absent from government records during the licensing process, and remarked that the entire procedure was a “fraudulent exercise,” implying an agreement between officials and the developer prior to the proceedings. The court mandated the CBI to complete its investigation within six months and instructed the state government to take necessary follow-up actions.
ALSO READ: Consumer Court: “Collection of Parking Fee in Shopping Malls is Unfair Trade Practice”
The Supreme Court bench has now invalidated the CBI investigation directive, stating that its initiation through judicial orders lacked legal foundation. However, it clarified that its ruling does not impede other legal actions ongoing before the high court, including matters of land use, licensing discrepancies, and grievances from buyers.
The top court also paused the NGT’s order for the Ambience group to pay Rs 10 crore as environmental compensation for construction within a designated green area at the Ambience Lagoon Apartment complex. Nevertheless, the Supreme Court indicated that the NGT could renew its proceedings based on the legal ramifications of the current verdict.
The conflict surrounding the Ambience Mall project remains a contentious issue between the residents of the Ambience Lagoon housing complex and the developer, with residents alleging that land designated for community facilities and open spaces was commercially exploited without adequate disclosure or consent. Although the CBI inquiry will not proceed, the Supreme Court’s decision guarantees that broader legal and environmental concerns related to the project will continue to receive judicial examination.
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES
