Bombay High Court
Shri. Pravinsinh Jaysingrao ... vs The State Of Maharashtra Through ... on 13 April, 2016
Bench: Ranjit More
WP 11144 of 2015.doc
vks
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.11144 OF 2015.
1. Shri. Pravinsinh Jaysingrao Ghatage,
Age 58 years, Occn. Business.
R/o: 249/A/2B, Jay Villa Nagala Park,
Kolhapur.
2. Ms. Madhurika Pravinsinh Ghatage,
age: 29 years, Occn. Business,
R/o: 249/A/2B, Jay Villa Nagala Park,
Kolhapur. .. Petitioners.
V/s.
1. The State of Maharashtra
Through the Secretary
Urban Development Department,
Mantralaya, Mumbai 400 032.
2. The Director of Town Planning,
Maharashtra State,
Pune 400 001.
3. Kagal Municipal Council,
Kagal, Tal. Kagal,
District: Kolhapur
Through its Chief Officer.
4. The Assistant Director of Town
Planning & Town Planning Officer,
Kolhapur .... Respondents
1
::: Uploaded on - 05/05/2016 ::: Downloaded on - 29/07/2016 22:05:20 :::
WP 11144 of 2015.doc
Mr. Prashant Bhavake, for the petitioner.
Mrs. M. P. Thakur, AGP, for the Respondent-State.
Mr. Tanaji Mhatugade, for respondent No.3.
CORAM : RANJIT MORE &
DR. SHALINI PHANSALKAR-JOSHI, JJ.
DATE : 13th APRIL, 2016.
JUDGMENT. : [PER : DR. SHALINI PHANSALKAR-JOSHI, J.]
1. Rule.
2. Rule made returnable forthwith.
3. With the consent of the parties, heard finally at the stage of
admission.
4. This petition is preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution
of India, for declaration that the entire reservation being Reservation
No.22 for Primary School and Playground admeasuring 77 R, and
Reservation No.23 for garden admeasuring 1 Hector and 15 R, kept on
petitioners' land bearing survey No.255 situate at Kagal, District: Kolhapur,
in revised final development plan for Kagal City has been lapsed in view
of the provisions of Section 127(2) of the Maharashtra Regional & Town
Planning and 1966 (for short called as, "MRTP Act") and to direct the
respondents to release the said land to the petitioners, for their own use.
WP 11144 of 2015.doc
5. Undisputedly, the petitioners are the owners of above said
land which was their ancestral property. Final Development Plan of the
Kagal Municipal Council came into force on 25th October, 1986. In the said
plan, the above said reservations were shown as reservation No.22 and
23. As even after lapse of 10 years from the final development plan
coming into force, no proceedings for acquisition were taken up, the
petitioners issued purchase notice to respondent No.3 Municipal Council
on 18th October, 2012 under the provisions of Section 127(2) of the MRTP
Act.
6. In pursuance thereto, respondent No.3 Municipal Council,
submitted their proposal to the District Collector, Kolhapur on 11.2.2013,
requesting to start acquisition proceedings immediately. However, said
proposal was returned with direction to remove deficiencies including the
availability of funds and resolution of the General Body of the Municipal
Council.
7. The Managing Committee of the Municipal Council, thereafter
discussing the subject and taking into consideration the financial crisis of
the Municipal Council, vide resolution No.29 dated 13.10.2013, resolved
not to take steps to acquire the property of the petitioners and the said
fact was communicated to the State of Maharashtra requesting to issue
notification for deletion of these reservations. The proposal to that effect
WP 11144 of 2015.doc
was also submitted by Kagal Municipal Council to the Secretary, Urban
Development Department on 27.1.2015.
8. A detail Affidavit bringing all these facts on record is filed on
behalf of respondent No.3 Municipal Council by one Shri.Prabhakar
Ramchandra Patki, Chief Officer of Municipal Council.
9. In the light of this factual position and in the light of legal
position as laid down by the Apex Court in its landmark decision in
Bhavnagar University -vs. Palitana Sugar Mills Pvt. Ltd., 2003 (2)
S.C.C. 111 and the said legal position further reaffirmed by our own High
Court in Baburao Dhondiba Salokhe -vs- Kolhapur Municipal
Corporation and anr, 2003 (5) Bom C.R.232, it has to be held that as
even after lapse of 10 years from the date of coming into force of the final
development plan for Kagal Municipal Council and even after expiry of
one year from the receipt of purchase notice issued by the petitioners, no
steps are taken by the Municipal Council, for acquisition of petitioners'
land, conversely has pleaded it's inability to acquire the said land in view
of financial crisis, it has to be held that the petitioners' land has been
released from the acquisition. The reservation on the said land has
already lapsed in view of provisions of section 127(2) of the MRTP Act.
10. This petition, therefore, stands allowed.
WP 11144 of 2015.doc
11. It is declared that the entire reservation being Reservation
No.22 (for Primary School and Play Ground admeasuring 77 R) and
reservation No.23 (for Garden admeasuring 1 Hector 15 R), kept on
petitioners' land bearing Survey No.255 situate at Kagal, in the revised
development plan for Kagal City, has been lapsed in view of Section
127(2) of the MRTP Act and the said land has been released to the
petitioners for their own use.
12. Rule made absolute in above terms.
[DR. SHALINI PHANSALKAR-JOSHI, J.] [RANJIT MORE, J.]
