HARYANA URBAN DEV. ATY. vs ROOCHIRA CERAMICS

The Supreme Court held that the Punjab & Haryana High Court erred in entertaining the respondent's plea of financial stringency in a writ petition under Article 226, as it was not raised before the Estate Officer. The Court emphasized that the High Court's role is limited to examining procedural correctness and not the merits of the case, and that there was no procedural irregularity in the actions taken under Section 17(3) and Section 17(4) of the Huda Act. Consequently, the Supreme Court allowed the appeal, setting aside the High Court's judgment and dismissing the writ petition.