0501WP4740.17-Judgment 1/5
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
WRIT PETITION NO. 4740 OF 2017
PETITIONER :- Vivek s/o RajanjiChhabda, aged major,
occupation Business, R/o Gandhinagar,
Amravati, Districdt Amravati.
...VERSUS...
RESPONDENTS :- 1. State of Maharashtra, Through the Chief
Secretary, Urban Development Department,
Mantralaya-32.
2. The Municipal Corporation of Amravati,
Rajkamal Chowk, Amravati (through its
Commissioner).
3. The Assistant Director of Town Planning,
Municipal Corporation, Amravati, Rajkamal
Chowk, Amravati.
4. The Collector, Amravati Camp, District
Amravati.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. P.A.Rajurkar & Mr. R.S.Suryawanshi, counsel for the petitioner.
Shri B.M.Lonare, Asstt.Govt.Pleader for the respondent Nos.1 and 4.
Mr. Sushil Ghodeswar, counsel for the respondent Nos.2 and 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A NAIK &
ARUN D. UPADHYE
, JJ.
DATED : 05.01.2018 ::: Uploaded on - 09/01/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 10/01/2018 01:23:54 ::: 0501WP4740.17-Judgment 2/5 O R A L J U D G M E N T (Per : Smt.Vasanti A Naik, J.) Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. The writ petition is heard finally at the stage of admission with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties.
2. By this writ petition, the petitioner seeks a declaration that the reservation of the land of the petitioner, bearing Plot Nos.1, 2, 3 and 4 in Survey No.192/4 of Mouza Badnera has lapsed in view of the provisions of section 127 of the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 and the petitioner would be entitled to develop the land as is permissible for the adjoining land as per the relevant final development plan.
3. The petitioner is the owner of Plot Nos.1, 2, 3 and 4 in Survey No.192/4 of Mouza Badnera. The final development plan for Badnera City was published on 25/02/1993. Since no steps were taken by the Planning Authority-Municipal Corporation, Amravati for the acquisition of the land within 10 years from the date of publication of the final development plan, the petitioner served a purchase notice under section 127 of the Act on the respondent-Municipal Corporation ::: Uploaded on - 09/01/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 10/01/2018 01:23:54 ::: 0501WP4740.17-Judgment 3/5 on 22/07/2015. Since no steps were taken by the Municipal Corporation for the acquisition of the said land within 12 months from the date of service of the notice on the respondent-Municipal Corporation, according to the petitioner, the reservation of his land under the final development plan was lapsed, in view of the provisions of section 127(1) of the Act.
4. Shri Ghodeswar, the learned counsel for the respondent- Municipal Corporation fairly admits that the Corporation had not taken any effective steps for the acquisition of the land, inasmuch as the relevant notification for the acquisition of the land was not published within twelve months from the date of receipt of the notice on 24/07/2015. It is stated that the Corporation had offered TDR to the petitioner, but the petitioner had refused to accept the same. It is stated that the Corporation was ready to grant TDR to the petitioner as at the relevant time, it was not in a position to acquire the land under the provisions of the Act.
5. On hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner and the respondent-Municipal Corporation, it appears that the reservation of the land of the petitioner is deemed to have lapsed, in view of the provisions of section 127(1) of the Act. Admittedly, no steps were taken ::: Uploaded on - 09/01/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 10/01/2018 01:23:54 ::: 0501WP4740.17-Judgment 4/5 by the Municipal Corporation or the State Government for the acquisition of the said land within 10 years from the date of publication of the final development plan on 25/02/1993. Admittedly, the notification under the Act of 2013 was not issued by the Municipal Corporation or the State Government for the acquisition of the land of the petitioner within twelve months from the date of receipt of the notice on 24/07/2015. In view of the clear provisions of section 127(1) of the Act of 1966 and the inaction on the part of the Municipal Corporation to take effective steps for the acquisition of the land of the petitioner, the reservation of the land of the petitioner is deemed to have lapsed. In the circumstances of the case, it would be necessary to hold that the land of the petitioner is deemed to have been released from the reservation and the petitioner would be entitled to develop the land as is permissible, in the case of the adjacent land under the relevant final development plan. It cannot be said that there is no lapsing of the reservation merely because the respondent-Municipal Corporation had offered TDR to the petitioner and the petitioner had refused to accept the same.
6. Hence, for the reasons aforesaid, the writ petition is allowed. It is hereby declared that the reservation of the land of the petitioner in the final development plan has lapsed and the land is ::: Uploaded on - 09/01/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 10/01/2018 01:23:54 ::: 0501WP4740.17-Judgment 5/5 deemed to have been released from the reservation and the same is available to the petitioner for the purpose of development as is permissible in the case of the adjacent land under the final development plan.
Rule is made absolute in the aforesaid terms with no order as to costs.
JUDGE JUDGE
KHUNTE
::: Uploaded on - 09/01/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 10/01/2018 01:23:54 :::