JUDGMENT Hon’ble Ajit Kumar, J.—Heard Sri K.M. Garg, learned counsel for petitioners and learned Standing Counsel as well as Sri Shivam Yadav, Advocate for respondents. 2. Both these writ petitions involve common questions of fact and law, therefore, as agreed by learned counsel for parties the same are heard together and being decided by this common judgment. 3. Since basic question is common in both writ petitions, therefore, for the purpose of brief factual matrix, this Court is referring to pleadings of Writ Petition No. 43275 of 2015 which has been filed by petitioner-Ajeet Singh Chauhan. 4. Petitioner has challenged notice issued by New Okhla Industrial Development Authority (hereinafter referred to as the “NOIDA”) dated 29.7.2015 requiring petitioner to immediately stop raising construction over land in question, remove constructions from land in question or show-cause, if any, within three days, failing which entire construction shall be demolished and charges incurred in such exercise by NOIDA will be recovered. 5. Assailing aforesaid order-cum-notice issued by Respondent-3, petitioner submits that land in question falls in Village Abadi of Village Baraula, Pargana and Tehsil Dadri, District Gautambudh Nagar, which is not acquired by NOIDA. Petitioner submits that land in question, i.e. Plots No. 1226 and 1227, situate in Village Baraula was in fact land of one Nauraj Singh and others, being original land holders, who executed sale-deed in favour of Vikas Sahkari Awas Samiti Limited on 13.9.2004 and this is how Vikas Sahkari Awas Samiti Limited came to be recorded in Revenue record on 20.11.2004. Later on this land alongwith other land was sold by Vikas Sahkari Awas Samiti Limited to M/s Noida Internet Services Private Limited, a Company registered under Indian Companies Act, 1956, vide registered sale-deed dated 21.10.2010. Thus M/s Noida Internet Services Private Limited came to be recorded in Revenue record over land in question on 28.1.2011. Subsequently, M/s Noida Internet Services Private Limited sold this land to petitioner vide registered sale-deed dated 13.7.2012. This is how petitioner came to be recorded over land in question in revenue records on 19.12.2012. 6. According to petitioner since constructions over land in question were in dilapidated condition, he proceeded to demolish the same so as to erect new construction over the said plots. Relevant Khasra and Khatauni in this regard is brought on record. This is how petitioner came to be recorded over land in question in revenue records on 19.12.2012. 6. According to petitioner since constructions over land in question were in dilapidated condition, he proceeded to demolish the same so as to erect new construction over the said plots. Relevant Khasra and Khatauni in this regard is brought on record. It is the case of petitioner that land is still within territorial limits of Village Panchayat and Pradhan is duly elected in last election held in 2010. It is submitted that while constructions were going on, suddenly on 28.7.2015 Respondents-3 and 4, alongwith some other officials with police force came on spot and threatened petitioner to seal entire property and also to demolish construction which was existing on spot. Petitioner could hardly understand anything about legal niceties involved in action being taken by NOIDA. On 29.7.2015 a demolition notice was pasted on petitioner’s premises which is impugned in writ petition. 7. The contention advanced by learned counsel for petitioner assailing impugned demolition notices is that NOIDA has no authority to exercise such power in respect of a Village Abadi land in a village which is not vested in NOIDA. Submission has been advanced on the scope of Act No. 6 of 1976, namely, U.P. Industrial Area Development Act, 1976 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act, 1976”) and Regulations and Directions framed thereunder. 8. Contention of petitioner is that New Okhla Industrial Development Area Building Regulations, 2010 (hereinafter referred to as “Regulation, 2010”) are applicable only in respect of development and building activities in an area which is within the definition of “urbanisable area”. According to petitioner unless and until land falls in an “urbanisable area”, defined under Regulation, 2010 framed under Act, 1976, on any development activity with regard to construction of building, NOIDA has no role to play. 9. In this regard it is necessary to examine relevant provisions of Act, 1976 and Directions and Regulations issued thereunder in order to appreciate whether land in question will come within the meaning of development activity to be regulated by NOIDA. 10. From very object of Act, 1976 it is clear that this enactment was brought into force to carry out development activities in respect of such area that may be notified by State Government as industrial development area. 10. From very object of Act, 1976 it is clear that this enactment was brought into force to carry out development activities in respect of such area that may be notified by State Government as industrial development area. Section 2(d) defines “industrial development area” means an area declared as such by the State Government by notification. Section 3 of act, 1976 provides for constitution of Authority by State Government by notification and Section 6 provides for functions of Authority. Section 6 of Act, 1976 reads as under: “6. Functions of the Authority.—(1) The object of the Authority shall be to secure the planned development of the industrial development areas. (2) Without prejudice to the generality of the objects of the Authority, the Authority shall perform the following functions- (a) to acquire land in the industrial development area, by agreement or through proceedings under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 for the purposes of this Act; (b) to prepare a plan for the development of the industrial development area; (c) to demarcate and develop sites for industrial, commercial and residential purposes according to the plan; (d) to provide infrastructure for industrial, commercial and residential purposes; (e) to provide amenities; (f) to allocate and transfer either by way of sale or lease or otherwise plots of land for industrial, commercial or residential purposes; (g) to regulate the erection of buildings and setting up of industries; and (h) to lay down the purpose for which a particular site or plot of land shall be used, namely, for industrial or commercial or residential purpose or any other specified purpose in such area.” 11. From a bare perusal of aforesaid provision it is explicit that the very object of Authority constituted under the Act is to secure planned development of industrial area, obviously notified by State Government in this regard. Clause (a) of sub-section (2) provides for compulsory acquisition of land by the Authority for the purposes of this Act. Clause (b) of sub-section (2) provides for planned development of industrial area and Clause (g) provides for regulation with regard to erection of buildings and setting up of an industry. 12. Section 8 of Act, 1976 empowers the Authority to issue directions in respect of erection of buildings to be carried out in development area and Section 9 prohibits erection of any building in contravention of regulations framed under Act, 1976 by Authority. 12. Section 8 of Act, 1976 empowers the Authority to issue directions in respect of erection of buildings to be carried out in development area and Section 9 prohibits erection of any building in contravention of regulations framed under Act, 1976 by Authority. Sub-section (2) of Section 9 provides that Authority may by notification and with prior approval of State Government make regulations to regulate erection of building. Section 9 of Act, 1976 reads as under: “9. Ban on erection of buildings in contravention of regulations.—(1) No person shall erect or occupy any building in the industrial development area in contravention of any building regulation made under sub-section (2). (2) The Authority may by notification and with the prior approval of the State Government, make regulations to regulate the erection of buildings and such regulations may provide for all or any of the following matters, namely,- (a) the materials to be used for external and partition walls, roofs, floors and other parts of a building and their position or location or the method of construction; (b) lay out plan of the building whether industrial, commercial or residential; (c) the height and slope of the roofs and floors of any building which is intended to be used for residential or cooking purposes; (d) the ventilation in, or the space to be left about any building or part thereof to secure circulation of air or for the prevention of fire; (e) the number and height of the storeys of any building; (f) the means to be provided for the ingress and egress to and from any buildings; (g) the minimum dimensions of rooms intended for use as living rooms or sleeping rooms and the provision of ventilation; (h) any other matter in furtherance of the proper regulation of erection, completion and occupation of buildings; and (i) the certificates necessary and incidental to the submission of plans, amended plans and completion reports.” 13. Section 12 of Act, 1976 makes provision for application of certain provisions of Chapter VII of U.P. Urban Planning and Development Act, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act, 1973”) in its modified form as per U.P. President’s Act (Re-enactment with Modifications) Act, 1974 by way of adaptation. Section 12 of Act, 1976 makes provision for application of certain provisions of Chapter VII of U.P. Urban Planning and Development Act, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act, 1973”) in its modified form as per U.P. President’s Act (Re-enactment with Modifications) Act, 1974 by way of adaptation. Section 17 provides for an overriding effect of Act, 1976 upon such area which has fallen to be within the notified area under this Act, shall stand excluded from operation of Act, 1973. Section 18 provides for State Government to frame rules by notification for carrying out the purposes of Act, 1976. Section 19 provides power to make regulations with prior approval of State Government. It further provides for making of regulations by Authority constituted under the Act with prior approval of State Government. However, regulations have to be in consonance with the provisions of this Act or rules made thereunder for the administration of affairs of Authority. Sections 18 and 19 of Act, 1976 read as under: “18. Power to make rules.—The State Government may, by notification, make rules for carrying out the purposes of this Act. 19. Power to make regulations.—(1) The Authority may, with the previous approval of the State Government, make regulation not inconsistent with the provisions of this Act or the rules made thereunder for the administration of the affairs of the Authority. (2) In particular, and without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing power, such regulation may provide for all or any of the following matters, namely,- (a) the summoning and holding of meetings of the Authority, the time and place where such meetings are to be held, the conduct of business at such meetings, and the number of members necessary to form a quorum thereat; (b) the powers and duties of the Chief Executive Officer; (c) the form of register of application for permission to erect a building; (d) the management of properties of the Authority ; (e) fees to be levied in the discharge of its functions; (f) such other matters as are to be provided for in regulation.” 14. From the provisions as quoted above, it is clear that as far as the object of Act, 1976 is concerned, State Government shall make rules and so far as functioning of Authority and its affairs are concerned, the Authority can itself make regulations with prior approval of State Government. 15. From the provisions as quoted above, it is clear that as far as the object of Act, 1976 is concerned, State Government shall make rules and so far as functioning of Authority and its affairs are concerned, the Authority can itself make regulations with prior approval of State Government. 15. By virtue of amendment by U.P. Act No. 4 of 2001 new Section 12-A was inserted under Act, 1976 which starts with a non-obstante clause taking away powers of Panchayat in respect of such industrial area which may fall within the territorial area of Panchayat if notified by State Government. Section 12-A of Act, 1976 reads as under: “12A. No Panchayat for Industrial Township.—Notwithstanding anything contained to the contrary in any Uttar Pradesh Act, where an industrial development area or any part thereof is specified to be an industrial township under the proviso to clause (1) of Article 243-Q of the Constitution, such industrial development area or part thereof, if included in a Panchayat area, shall, with effect from the date of notification made under the said proviso, stand excluded from such Panchayat area and no Panchayat shall be constituted for such industrial development area or part thereof under the United Provinces Panchayat Raj Act, 1947 or the Uttar Pradesh Kshettra Panchayats and Zila Panchayats Adhiniyam, 1961, as the case may be, and any Panchayat constituted for such industrial development area or part thereof before the date of such notification, shall cease to exist. Explanation.—The expression “Panchayat and Panchayat area” shall have the meanings respectively assigned to them in Part IX of the Constitution.” 16. From above provision it is very much clear that first the State Government has to notify an area to be an industrial area so as to the exclusion of powers of Panchayat as envisaged under Article 243-Q of the Constitution as a local authority and if such area is notified then the operation of Panchayat whether constituted under U.P. Panchayat Raj Act, 1947 or U.P. Kshettra Panchayats and Zila Panchayats Adhiniyam, 1961 will cease to have any territorial authority over such area. By virtue of Section 17 of Act, 1976 the Authority exercising powers under Act, 1973 shall cease to have any operational effect over such area. 17. By virtue of Section 17 of Act, 1976 the Authority exercising powers under Act, 1973 shall cease to have any operational effect over such area. 17. Conjoint reading of Sections 6, 8, 9, 18 and 19 of Act, 1976 leads us to draw only one conclusion that not only the area has to be notified by State Government as industrial area but the authority has to frame regulations and lay out plan to govern development activities in respect of industrial, commercial and residential buildings in such area and this is how planned development of industrial development area is to be secured as an object under the Act. 18. Thus after an area is notified as an industrial area it is the Authority constituted under Act, 1976 that shall have all the administrative powers in respect of developmental activities to be carried out in such area but in order to regulate such development activities, the Authority shall have to make necessary regulations and frame a lay out plan under Section 19 read with Section 9 of Act, 1976 and in absence of any such regulations and lay out plan being framed with prior approval of State Government even in respect of notified area, NOIDA does not have any power to regulate development activities. 19. Now we proceed to examine as to what areas are there in the context of NOIDA which are notified as development area and if an area is notified as a development area, whether any Regulations or Directions have been framed or issued with prior approval of State Government to carry out and regulate development activities in such area. 20. Exercising aforesaid powers under sub-section (1)(d) of sub-section (2) of Section 19, Regulations have been framed with approval of State Government called “New Okhla Industrial Development Authority Rural Abadi Site (Management and Regularization for Residential Purposes) Regulations, 2006” (hereinafter referred to as the “Regulations, 2006”). These regulations provide management and regularization of residential purposes of Abadi sites in respect of land acquired by Authority under the provisions of Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act, 1894”) or such land which has been resumed from Gaon Sabha. These regulations provide management and regularization of residential purposes of Abadi sites in respect of land acquired by Authority under the provisions of Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act, 1894”) or such land which has been resumed from Gaon Sabha. The relevant Regulation 1 sub-clause (4) of Regulations, 2006 reads as under: “(4) It shall extend to all such rural land which has been used as Abadi on the date of commencement of these regulation and at the same the land has been actually used as Abadi land as on the date of notification under Section 4 and Section 17 of Land Acquisition Act and has been acquired under provision of the Land Acquisition Act or land has been resumed from the Gram Sabha.” 21. Thus power to regulate residential Abadi site in rural area is preceded by condition that such land which has been either acquired by Act, 1894 or resumed from Gaon Sabha concerned in whose territorial jurisdiction land falls, will come within the authority of respondents to regulate development activity in Abadi Village. 22. Now it is to be seen, whether area of Village Baraula, where land which is claimed to be Abadi land by petitioner, is the land covered under these Regulations or not. 23. Specific averment has been made in para 9 of writ petition that land of Khasra No. 1226 and 1227 of Village Abadi of Villlage Baraula has not been acquired by NOIDA. vide para 21 of counter-affidavit filed on behalf of respondent Nos. 2, 3 and 4 it has been categorically stated that land in question has not been acquired. Meaning thereby, land does not stand vested with NOIDA as far as Regulations, 2006 (supra), regarding rural abadi site, are concerned. 24. Now we come to the provisions contained under Section 9 of Act, 1976 which gives authority to NOIDA to put a ban on such development activities in respect of construction or erection of building which are in violation of Regulations. In this regard, New Okhla Industrial Development Area Building Regulations and Directions, 2006 (hereinafter referred to as the “Directions, 2006”) have been framed which provide for building regulations and directions to be carried out by NOIDA in relation to developmental activities within the territorial limits of NOIDA. It provides for building lay out site plan for all types of buildings including multistoried buildings. It provides for building lay out site plan for all types of buildings including multistoried buildings. These Regulations, however, are applicable in respect of an “area” defined under Act, 1976 and does not cover Village Abadi area. Regulations, 2006 are chiefly concerned about development activities being carried out with regard to planned development as prescribed by NOIDA. These Regulations, 2006 came to be superseded by Regulations, 2010 framed in exercise of power under Section 19 of Act, 1976. Regulations, 2010 clearly provide vide Clause 1.3 of Chapter-I that it shall apply to building activities within “urbanisable area”. Chapter V of Regulations, 2010 deal with area designated for agricultural use by the Authority. Clause 1.3 of Chapter-I, reads as under: “1.3 Chapter I to IV shall apply to building activities within the urbanisable area and Chapter V, shall apply to the area designated for agricultural use by the Authority.” 25. The urbanisable area has been defined in Clause 2.65 of Regulations, 2010 which reads as under: “2.65 ‘Urbanisable Area’ means the area earmarked for any of the following uses in the Development Plan/Master Plan. (i) Residential; (ii) Commercial; (iii) Industrial; (iv) Institutional; (v) Green area (vi) Transportation, and (vii) Any other Special uses as specified in the Development Plan/Master Plan/Scheme duly approved by the Authority.” 26. The argument advanced is that area in question are not “urbanisable area” and, therefore, development plan and master plan meant for “urbanisable area” are not applicable in the instant case. 27. It is true that residential activities covered in respect of urbanisable area are to be regulated by NOIDA but the area which is to be called as “Village Abadi” is not an “urbanisable area”. Chapter-V of Regulations, 2010 are also not attracted in respect of residential area in Village Abadi. Chapter-V of Regulations, 2010 lay down construction plan only for farm house buildings in agricultural use zone and this is not the case in hand. 28. Having gone through relevant provisions of Act, 1976 and Regulations, 2006 and 2010, we find that in respect of Village Abadi unless an area is acquired and vested with NOIDA, under Act, 1894 or by way of resumption of land from Gaon Sabha, NOIDA cannot regulate residential-cum-building activities in such areas and, therefore, question of sanction of map or prior sanction of NOIDA for carrying out construction activities in “Village Abadi” does not arise. It has come admittedly on record that no building plan and Regulations and Directions have been framed with regard to building activities in respect of “Village Abadi”. 29. Learned counsel for respondents-NOIDA has placed heavy reliance upon para 14 of counter-affidavit which reads as under: “14. That the contents of paragraph No. 9 of the writ petition is not admitted as stated hence denied. However, it is submitted that the sale-deed which was obtained by the petitioner clearly mentions that the petitioner has purchased the vacant piece of land and therefore, it cannot be called as Abadi alongwith that Khasra Nos. 1226 and 1227 although are not acquired but they falls within the notified area of the Noida as well as Villabe Barona is a notified village of the Noida under Section 2(D) of the Act, 1976.” 30. It is interesting to notice that this paragraph has been sworn on the basis of record but no documents have been appended alongwith counter-affidavit to demonstrate that this Village Abadi site was notified area within the meaning of Section 2(d) read with Section 6 of Act, 1976. The paragraph was also silent, whether any industrial development plan has been prepared by NOIDA with regard to Village in question and whether this village is within the industrial township as far as Regulation, 2010 are concerned. There is no doubt that after insertion of Section 12-A of Act, 1976 by Act No. 4 of 2001 powers of Panchayat in respect of area falling within the development area notified by State Government has been taken away but respondents authorities have to demonstrate that a particular area which is claimed to be not covered within Regulation, 2010 have really been notified or not. No notification has been brought to our notice by NOIDA to demonstrate that area in question has stood notified. 31. Besides the above, even if an area is notified, development activities can be regulated and controlled in such area by Development Authority concerned, provided they are within the definition of “urbanisable area”, otherwise Development Authority is in clear error of law in creating obstruction in any such construction of building which is not in violation of regulations framed by them as being not applicable to area in question. Neither Regulations, 2006 nor Regulations, 2010 govern the development activities of village in question and, therefore, we have no hesitation in holding that order-cum-notice dated 29.7.2015 is per se illegal and liable to be quashed. 32. In view of above and the admission made by NOIDA in counter-affidavit, impugned order-cum-notice dated 29.7.2015 is per se illegal and is hereby quashed. Writ petitions are allowed with no order as to costs.