A. G. QUTESHI, J. ( 1 ) THE petitioner is a Co-operative Society. It is registered under the M. P. Co-operative Societies Act, 1960. About 600 persons are its members. The petitioner-Society has purchased lands detailed in para 3 of the petition in village Piplyaehana, tahsil and district indore. The State of M. P. has exempted the aforesaid lands belonging to the petitioner Society from the provisions of the Urban Land (Ceiling and regulation) Act, 1976. One of the conditions of the exemption is to develop the land into residential colony. The Director of Town and Country planning, has prepared a development plan of Indore City. The State government, after following the procedure, has approved the plan and it was published in the Official Gazette dated 21-5-1975. ( 2 ) ACCORDING to the petitioner, after coming into force of the development plan the use and development of the land in the planning area should conform to the plan of development as has been provided under Section 25 of the Town and Country Planning Act and no person is empowered to change the use of any land or carry out any development without permission in writing of the Director. Contravention of the provisipp is made punishable under Section 36 of the Act. The entire land of the petitioner-Society is situated within the planning area pf Indore for which the development plan has come into operation from 21-5-1975. The petitioner further avers that all the survey numbers of the land of the petitioner is proposed in the development plan for residential purposes. The certificate of the land use designated in the development plan pf Indore issued by the respondent No. 3 is annexed as Annexure-I. The certificate is dated 20-2-1986 ( 3 ) THE petitioner-Society applied on 2-8-1988 to respondent No. 3 under Section 29 of the Act for permission to carry out development by providing residential plots over the land bearing survey Nos. 117 (part), 118 (part), 119, 120 (part), 123 (part) and 168 admeasuring 1. 8470 hectares situated in village Piplyahana, tahsil and district Indore (hereinafter referred to as the land in question ). A lay-out plan was also submitted along with the application. According to the petitioner, the application and lay-out plan is in conformity with the land use designated in the development plan of Indore planning area. 8470 hectares situated in village Piplyahana, tahsil and district Indore (hereinafter referred to as the land in question ). A lay-out plan was also submitted along with the application. According to the petitioner, the application and lay-out plan is in conformity with the land use designated in the development plan of Indore planning area. However, the respondent No. 3, instead of according permission to the petitioner informed it by its letter dated 18-8-88 that according to the Zoning Plan No 6-E, the land in question is proposed for commercial centre, community hall and Sarvajanik Suvidha and, therefore, permission for residential use cannot be granted. The petitioner was also informed that if they want to use the land for any of the aforesaid purposes they can make an application. In reply to the aforesaid letter the Society again requested respondent No 3 by letter dated 5-9-1988 that the land in question is reserved for the purposes of residence in the development plan and permission, therefore, should be granted after considering the development plan of Indore. The respondent No. 3 again rejected the application for permission by its letter dated 28-9-1988, by saying that the land in question is proposed For purposes of stadium in the development plan and in Zoning plan No. 6-E for Community Centre, Community Hall, Sarvajanik suvidha and Park. Therefore, permission contrary to Zoning Plan No. 6-E cannot be granted. ( 4 ) ACCORDING to the petitioner-Society, in the development plan of indore the land in question is designated for residential purpose only. The certificate Annexure-I was issued by the respondent No. 3 itself. The plea of the respondent No. 3 that it is reserved for stadium is absolutely incorrect. The proposed stadium is far away from the land in question and the statement runs counter to certificate Annexure-I. As the land in question is reserved for residential purpose in the master plan it cannot be designated for any other purpose because such a change in the land use is contrary to the provisions of Section 25 of the Town and Country Planing Act (herein after called the Act ). Zoning plan is prepared according to Section 20 of the Act and according to Section 21 of the Act the Zoning Plan shall enlarge the details of the land use indicated in the development plan Therefore, the Zoning Plan cannot be in variation with the Master Plan. Zoning plan is prepared according to Section 20 of the Act and according to Section 21 of the Act the Zoning Plan shall enlarge the details of the land use indicated in the development plan Therefore, the Zoning Plan cannot be in variation with the Master Plan. A Zoning plan is only an enlargement of the Master Plan. When once in the development plan the land is designated for residential purposes, in a Zoning Plan the use of the land cannot be changed. Therefore, while preparing the zoning Plan if the land use of the land in question has been changed, then it is against the provisions of law and, therefore, illegal. Permission has been refused to the petitioner only on the ground that in Zoning Plan No. 6-E of Indore the land use is not residential. The petitioner, therefore, prays that the order of the respondent No. 3 refusing to accord permission to the petitioner for developing a residential colony on the land in question should be queshed direction be issued that the permission in consonance with the Master Plan be given to the petitioner. The petitioner has also filed the copies of the Master Plan and Zoning Plan alongwith the petition. ( 5 ) THE respondents Nos 1 and 3 have constested this petition. The petition is resisted on the ground that the Zoning Plan has been approved by the State Government on 9th March, 1981 and the legal position is this that once the Zoning Plan is approved, the land use shown in the Zoning plan becomes the land use under the Master Plan, according to law and the permission is accorded only in accordance with the Zoning Plan. As a matter of fact, in the development plan there is a general description of the land use, but the description is without details. Although it is admitted that in Annexure-I the land use has been described by the office of respondent No. 3 as residential in the Master Plan, but in fact the aforesaid information given to the petitioner is legally of no help to the petitioner. The aforesaid letter Annexure-I was given because no detailed inspection of the land was made, but on detailed inspection it was found that in the master Plan the land is reserved for stadium. The aforesaid letter Annexure-I was given because no detailed inspection of the land was made, but on detailed inspection it was found that in the master Plan the land is reserved for stadium. This mistake was corrected when the petitioner made an application for permission to develop the land in question as residential colony. According to the respondent the land use in the Master Plan of the land in question is stadium. It has again been stated in the reply emphatically that after the acceptance of the Zoning plan by the Government the permission has to be accorded in conformity with the Zoning Plan and not with the Master Plan. Annexure-R1 Zoning plan has also been filed along with the reply. Later on a copy of the Master plan Annexure-R2 has also been filed on the record. ( 6 ) IN view of the aforesaid averments this Court, vide order dated 3-5-1989, after perusing copies of the Master Plan and the Zoning Plan and in view of the existence of residential colonies in the area shown as an area designated for stadium, directed respondent Nos. 2 and 3 to file a detailed affidavit of the Officers concerned, explaining the position by the respondents. One Shri Bhatt, who according to respondent No. 3 is the Town Planner and her counterpart at the I. D. A. , was appointed Commissioner to give report in respect of Planning Unit No. 6-E and the situation of the land in question. Accordingly report of Shri Bhatt was also filed and comments and objections on that report were also filed by the respondent No. 3. ( 7 ) IN the affidavit dated 4-7-1989 the respondent No. 3 has stated that no action has been taken by the Director. Town and Country Planning in respect of the existing residential colonies. One colony Tilak Nagar was in existence before the publication of the development plan. Although in the development Plan in which the land in question fall has been earmarked for recreational purposes, in the Zoning Plan a substantial part of the said area has been shown and earmarked for residential purpose The Zoning Plan was prepared and published in accordance with law and the area has since been developed in accordance with the Zoning Plan. In the Zonal Plan a part of the land belonging to the petitioner-Society has been shown for amenities like public building and community centre ; as per the Zoning plan the rest of the area, excluding the road, has been earmarked for residential purpose. ( 8 ) THE report of the Commissioner Shri Bhatt, Town Planner, has been filed and kept on record. According to him also the development plan has been prepared on a very small scale. As such the land uses are depicted only broadly. Therefore the land use cannot be identified at a micro level exclsively on that basis. As a planning process, the Zoning Plan is a more detailed exercise on the development plan. The Zoning Plan has to be prepared to enlarge the details of land uses as indicated in the development plan. Therefore, the publication of Zoning Plan 6-E is the further planning process of planning Unit 6 at mocro level. As such the Zoning Plan 6-E which is in operation is for a part of planning Unit 6. According to the zoning Plan the proposed stadium is located along the Eastern Ring Road re-1 to the West of the road. The stadium is bordered by a south-side 80 ft, wide road and on the North side it is surrounded by 40 ft. wide road towards the West of the stadium, residential use is shown in the Zoning plan. Similarly in the Development Plan also the recreational use is located along Ring Road RE-1 on its West side. On South and North Side this land is surrounded by a sector road and existing residential use is shown towards the West side of the land designated for recreational use. ( 9 ) ACCORDING to Shri Bhatt, the land in question as marked in Red in the Zoning Plan supplied to the Commissioner by the Joint Director Town and Country Planning, Indore, is surrounded by residential colonies which were in existence before the promulgation of Development Plan such as tilak Nagar, Vandana Nagar, Sainath Colony, Tirupati, Lalaram Nagar and by some newly approved colonies approved after the Zoning Plan came into operation such as Baktawar Nagar, Krishi Nagar, Girdhar Nagar, parichaika Nagar etc. The land use proposed for the land in question as per the Zoning Plan is public building, community centre, 80 ft. wide road and public utilities. The land use proposed for the land in question as per the Zoning Plan is public building, community centre, 80 ft. wide road and public utilities. These uses are permitted and permissible uses within a residential zone. The land use of further adjacent land on the West side of the stadium is marked as existing residential in the development plan and even beyond that the use as per development plan is existing residential. The land in question is situated in the existing residential use area to the west of the stadium. Hence, the land in question as marked in the Zoning plan is situated to the West of the RE-1 and the proposed stadium. The land use of this land as per the Development Plan is existing residential while its designated land use as per the Zoning Plan is public building, community centre, 80 ft. wide road and public utilities are permissible uses within a residential area. ( 10 ) THE respondents Nos. 2 and 3 have filed objections to the Commissioner's report. According to respondents Nos. 2 and 3, the report of the commissioner that the land in question is situated in the existing residential area in the Development Plan, is incorrect, since in the Development Plan the same has been shown as recreational. The report of the Commissioner pertaining to permissible use is also objected to on the ground that this was not the scope of the report. ( 11 ) THEREAFTER the respondent No. 3 has filed affidavit dated 30-8-1989 in the context of the query, vide para 1, that which of the residential colonies were in existence at the time of the Master Plan and which of the colonies were permitted after the Master Plan? According to Smt Rekha sharma, respondent No. 3, Sainath Colony, Vandana Nagar, Tilak Nagar extension and Mahaveer Nagar colonies were granted sanction prior to the coming into operation of the Development Plan. Alkapuri colony has been given sanction after the publication of the Development Plan, Indore and geeta Nagar after the Zoning Plan. The Community facilities have been earmarked as per the prevailing norms in the respective colonies. About the variations in the Master Plan it has been stated that the variations have been made according to the opinion of the Chief Town Planner and the norms fixed by the Government. The Community facilities have been earmarked as per the prevailing norms in the respective colonies. About the variations in the Master Plan it has been stated that the variations have been made according to the opinion of the Chief Town Planner and the norms fixed by the Government. ( 12 ) THE petitioner has also filed an application stating therein that as per the Development Plan, use of the petitioner's land has been shown as recreational according to the Joint Director, Town and Country Planning and in the return also she has reiterated that the land falls in the Master Plan in the recreational area. According to the petitioner the recreational area shown for stadium is about 80 acres which is rectangular in shape lying on the Western side of RE-1 and the same is shown in green colour and that the petitioner's land is situated far away beyond the Western side of this area. This area of 80 acres, which is shown at page 188 of the book on the Indore development Plan published by the Government, is reserved for stadium. The respondent 3 has admitted that the size of the stadium is reduced by 50 per cent in the Zonal Plan and the land shown in red in the plan filed by the respondents lies far away from the stadium and between the stadium and the land of the petitioner there are several residential colonies in the area shown as stadium in the Master Plan. ( 13 ) IN the Court it was stated by the Joint Director Town and Country planning that the area reserved for recreation is 300 acres and that the petitioner's land falls in that area. To counter the aforesaid submission made by the Joint Director, the petitioner has filed the affidavit of Sbri sunil 1c. Jain, a Civil Engineer. Shri Jain has filed the copies of the Development plan, which was given to him wherein he has marked A, D, C, D, and has stated that according to the scale given in the Plan i. e. 1" equivalent to 3770 ft. the size of portion in question on taking measurement according to scale is 2073 ft. x 1970 ft. , the total area comes to 37,13,120 square feet which comes to 85. 18 acres. the size of portion in question on taking measurement according to scale is 2073 ft. x 1970 ft. , the total area comes to 37,13,120 square feet which comes to 85. 18 acres. Smt. Rekha Sharma has filed a counter affidavit wherein she has stated that the map in the Master Plan book gives only the land uses. Besides, the map is only a photographic redaction of larger map. As such, a calculation of the type made by Shri Jain will not give a true picture of the intention of the framets of the Indore Development Plan who intended to give the broad land uses only. Even then, recording to the map, the subject area works out to about 90 acres, Smt. Sharma has stated that she had made a statement that the area is about 300 acres under the impression that the scale of the map is 1 inch equal to 1 mile. But after actually working out the area in accordance with the book, it is 90 acres and if it is worked out on the khasra map it is 171 45 acres. The area adjoining the recreational area is shown in Yellow. Since the petitioner's land would not qualify as existing residential area it would fall in the recreational area. Therefore, the case has to be decided on tue concerned Zoning Plan only. ( 14 ) THE learned counsel for the petitioner Shri S. D. Sanghi, in view of the aforesaid documents, report of the Commissioner and the submissions of the parties, argued that the plea of the respondent No. 3 is although inconsistent, self-contradictory and fully of contradictions. Her plea that the master Plan should be ignored and the land uses as fixed in the Zonal Plan should only be considered, is against the law and, therefore, it should be held that the order of refusal to accord permission to the petitioner for developing a residential colony is contrary to law and based on incorrect facts. ( 15 ) ON the other hand the learned counsel for the State Sbri Sekhar bhargava stated that the Zonal Plan actually details the land uses and it is the zonal Plan which has to be looked into while determining the land use and the opinion of the Expert of the Department should be treated as final in respect of measurements. ( 16 ) UNDER Chapter IV of the M. P. Nagar Tatha Gram Nivesh adhiniyam, 1973 (hereinafter called the Act) under the heading "planning areas And Development Plans", the State Government has to define the limits of the planning areas for the purposes of this Act, according to Section13. Then, according to Section 14 of the Act the Director has to prepare. Development Plans ; then after taking out the survey of the existing land use, the land use maps have to be prepared according to Section 15. The land use map has to be adopted after a notice to the public and thereafter under Section 16 there has to be a freeing of land use. Then under Section 17 the contents of the development plan are provided, wherein the Development Plan shall indicate broadly the land use proposed in the planning area. Then the broad allocation of areas or zones of land for residential, industrial, commercial or agricultural purpose have to be specified. Then provision for open spaces, parks, and gardens, green-belts, zoological gardens, play grounds, public institutions and offices, Highways, air-ports, railway station, bus terminal etc. has to be made inter alia with all the public amenities. Then the draft plan has to be published and under Section 19 of the Act the sanction is accorded to the Development Plan Under Section 20 of the Act, after the publication of the Development Plan the concerned authority shall prepare a Zoning Plan. The Zoning Plan shall enlarge the details of land use as indicated in the Development Plan and shall also indicate the land liable to acquisition for public purpose for the purposes of the Union government, the State Government, a Town and Country Development authority, a Special Areas Development Authority, a local authority, a public utility or any other authority established by or under any enactment for the time being in force. There is a proviso to Section 21, which says that provided that no land shall be so designated unless the acquisition proceedings are likely to be completed within ten years of the preparation of the plan. It is also enjoined in the same section to provide in the Zonal plan, if possible, the details of development of specific areas for housing, shopping centres, industrial areas, educational and cultural institutions and civic centres. It is also enjoined in the same section to provide in the Zonal plan, if possible, the details of development of specific areas for housing, shopping centres, industrial areas, educational and cultural institutions and civic centres. ( 17 ) SECTION 23 of the Act provides for review of development plan and Zoning Plan. Then Section 25 (1) of the Act specifically says that after the coming into force of the development plan, the use and development of land shall conform to the provision of the development plan. As such it is clear that a Zonal Plan cannot substitute the Master Plan and no one has any po ver to change the Master Plan or to make variations pertaining to the use of a particular area for a particular purpose. Therefore, the plea of the respondents that after the coming into force of the Zoning Plan the Master Plan cannot be pressed into service is inherently misconceived and wrong The Master Plan when once prepared has a sanctity, because once a plan is prepared after taking into consideration the existing and future needs of the City, for the overall development of the City, providing for all the civic amenities taking into consideration the future extension, the roads, drainage, water supply, Schools hospitals, bus stand, etc. the Zonal plan should only be an enlargement of the Master Plan and while preparing the Zonal Plan there cannot be any deviation from the Master Plan because the mandate of Section 25 (1) is very clear in that behalf. The only power given is under Section 23 for review of the Master Plan after the preparation of the Zonal Plan and in the event the Experts feel that any review of the Master Plan is necessary then only it can be done. But till the provision of Section 25 is on the Statute Pook, a Zoning Plan has to conform with the provisions of the Master Plan However, since the parties who have reaped the benefit of the deviation from the Master Plan are not before us and no challenge has been made to the sanction accorded to them in view of the Zonal Plan, we do not want to go any further into that question. ( 18 ) IN the instant case we find that although by Annexure 1 the Joint director, Town and Country Planning has certified the land in question as residential in the Indore Development Plan, the respondent No. 3- has come forward to State that it is a part of the area reserved for recreation. The commissioner Shri Bhatt, who is the Town Planner, stated that the land in question falls within the residential area according to the Master plan. According to the respondent No. 3 the area reserved for recreational purposes is 200 to 300 acres, but according to map published with the master Plan with a scale read with the affidavit of Shri Jain who has stated that the area is 85. 18 acres, the respondent No. 3 in her counter affidavit admitted that it is about 90 acres, but has again reiterated that according to the detailed khasras it may be about 172 acres. In the master Plan the stadium is provided in an area of 80 acres, but in the Zonal plan it has been reduced to 40 acres. ( 19 ) NOW, if we look to the Master Plan where in construction of a stadium of 80 acres has been provided, we find that part of Vandana Nagar, tilak Nagar and residential colonies would come within the area of the stadium. Even if according to the Zoning Plan, the stadium is reduced to 40 acres still just after the stadium and before the land in question, the existence of residential colonies have been shown. Even if according to the Zoning Plan, the stadium is reduced to 40 acres still just after the stadium and before the land in question, the existence of residential colonies have been shown. According to Annexure-R1 the Zoning Plan filed by the respondents itself the land in question is far away from the stadium and if according to the scale contained in annexure-R 1 itself is seen, then we find that just after the stadium land more than double the breadth of the stadium is already occupied with residential colonies and the land in question of the petitioner-Society is also covered from all sides by residential colonies i. e. Lalaram Nagar, Alkapuri nagar, Vandana Nagar, Tilak Nagar extension, Sainath Colony and other existing residential areas Therefore, there is no reason to disbelieve the report of the Commissioner Shri Bhatt, who is himself a Town Planner, when he says that the land in question is situated in the existing residential use area to the West of the stadium and, therefore, Annexure-1 cannot be said to have been issued under some mistake. It appears that the land use shown in the Master Plan or the Development Plan was rightly certified vide Annexure-1 as is corroborated by the report of the Commissioner, who is town Planner and also from the Map Annexure-R1 itself and the map of master Plan filed along with the petition, the scale of which has also been shown by Shri Jain, an Engineer. ( 20 ) A perusal of the land use prescribed in the Development Plan book, at Page 127 and in item 9. 60, at page 129, the stadium has been shown in the category recreational. The land in question is within zone 6-E of planning unit No 6 The green colour is for indicating the land use as recreational. The site of the stadium in the Plan is near the agricultural College covering 80 acres of land From a bare perusal of the map of the planning area in Zone 6-E, it is manifest that between the petitioner's land