Bhagyachandra Ramrakshamal ... vs State Of Maharashtra And Ors.
2004 Latest Caselaw 1286 Bom

JUDGMENT

1. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondents.

2. Mr. Bhangde, learned Counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner Nos. 1 to 4 are the owners of Plot Nos. 1/35, 1/36, 1/37 and 1/38, admeasuring 4800 sq. ft., 4800 sq. ft., 4280 sq. ft. and 4800 esq., respectively situated at Rajapeth, Amravati. It is submitted that in the year 1974 the Final Development Plan came into force and in the said Development Plan, the above plots were shown in the residential zone. It is submitted that the revised draft Development Plan was published on 3-11-1988 and in the said revised draft Development Plan, the above referred plots were shown to be reserved for play-ground and recreation activities (appropriate Proposal No. 194). It is submitted that the above revised Development Plan was sanctioned by the State Government on 4-12-1992 and came into effect from 25th February, 1993.

3. Mr. Bhangde, the learned Counsel for the petitioner states that as per Section 127 of the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966, the owner of the land is entitled to serve notice on the Planning Authority if the land is not acquired as per the reservation shown in the Development Plan within a period of 10 years and on receipt of such notice, the Planning Authority are required to acquire the land within six months, failing which the reservation made in the Development Plan lapses. It is submitted that in the instant case the draft Development Plan came into effect on 25th February, 1993. The Planning Authority has not acquired the land for the purpose for which it is reserved in the Development Plan till 25-3-2003 i.e. within the period of 10 years and therefore, in view of Section 127, the petitioner issued notice to the Planning Authority dated 21st April, 2004, which was served on respondent Nos. 2 and 3 on 24th April, 2004, wherein the petitioners have requested to these authorities to acquire the land if they are interested within the stipulated time.

4. Mr. Bhangde, the learned Counsel for the petitioners states that in spite of the above referred notice served on the Planning Authority, nothing has been done within six months from the date of service of the notice and therefore, in view of Section 127 of the Act, the reservation stand lapsed and therefore, appropriate declaration in this regard may kindly be given.

5. Mr. Chandurkar, learned Senior Counsel appearing for respondent No. 2 Municipal Corporation, Amravati, does not dispute the factual aspect of the matter and states that the reservation was made for respondent No. 3. Mrs. T. D. Khade, learned AGP appearing for respondent No. 1 states that the controversy involved in the present petition is between the petitioners and the respondent Nos. 2 and 3.

6. We have considered the contention canvassed by the respective counsel for the petitioners as well as respondent Nos. 1 and 2. Respondent No. 3 though served is not represented by any lawyer nor present in person before the Court. In the instant case, the following facts are not disputed namely - the final development plan came into effect on 25th February, 1993, and in the said development plan, the plot Nos. 1/35, 1/36, 1/37 and 1/38 situated at Rajapeth, Amravati, were reserved for play-ground and recreation activities. As per section 127 of the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966, if the land reserved in the development plan under this Act is not acquired by agreement within 10 years from the date on which a final Regional plan, or final Development plan comes into force or if proceedings for the acquisition of such land under this Act or Under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, are not commenced within such period, the owner of the land is entitled to serve notice on the Planning Authority, Development Authority and if within six months from the date of service of such notice, the land is not acquired or no steps are taken for its acquisition, the reservation, allotment or designation shall be deemed to have lapsed, and the land shall be deemed to be released from such reservation, and shall become available to the owner for the purpose of development as otherwise, permissible in the case of adjacent land Under the relevant plan.

7. In view of the above referred scheme of section 127 of the Act, the reservation continues to exists for a period of 10 years from the date of coming into force the final Development plan and if the land is not acquired either by agreement or under the provisions of Land Acquisition Act within 10 years from the date on which the final development plan came into existence, the owner of the land, under the scheme of section 127 of the Act, is entitled to serve notice on the Planning Authority to initiate the proceeding for acquisition and if after service of such notice, the Planning Authority or the Development Authority fails to initiate proceedings for acquisition of the lands in question then the reservation in respect of such lands shown in the Development Plan lapses and the land thereafter become available to the owner for the purpose of development as otherwise permissible in the case of adjacent land Under the relevant plan.

8. In the instant case, it is not in dispute that the period of 10 years is lapsed on 25-3-2003. It is also not in dispute that during such period neither the Planning Authority nor the Development Authority has initiated proceedings for acquiring land either by agreement or under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act. It is also not in dispute that the petitioners have issued notice to the Planning/Development Authority, dated 21st April, 2004, requesting them to acquire the land in question, if they so desire. The said notice was served on 24th April, 2004 on the authorities concerned. However, the authorities have failed to initiate proceedings for acquisition within six months from the date of receipt of such notice from the petitioner who are owners of the land in question and therefore, under the provisions of Section 127 of the Act, we are of the considered view that the reservation in respect of the land of the petitioners in question automatically lapsed.

For the reasons stated herein above, the reservation shown in respect of the land of the petitioners in the Final Development Plan which came into effect on 25th February, 1993, is hereby declared to be lapsed. The land in question shall deemed to be released from such reservation and shall be available to the petitioners for the purposes of development as otherwise permissible in the case of adjacent land Under the relevant development plan.

Rule made absolute in the above term.

No Order as to costs.