Smt. Manjudevi Kahaiyalal Balani ... vs Corporation Of The City Of Nagpur ...
2016 Latest Caselaw 4320 Bom

    26-J-WP-4990-15                                                                                1/5


                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY




                                                                                           
                             NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.




                                                                   
                              WRIT PETITION NO.4990 OF 2015


    1.  Manjudevi K. Balani 
         aged 51 years, Occ. Business 




                                                                  
    2.  Kirandevi Suresh Balani
         aged about 45 years. Occ. Business. 




                                                     
         Both r/o Komal Palace Ramdaspeth, 
         Nagpur.                       ig                             ... Petitioners. 
     
    -vs-
                                     
        Corporation of City of Nagpur 
        Through its Municipal Commissioner, 
        Civil Lines, Nagpur.                                          ... Respondent.
             

    And 
          



       Kabir Nagar Nehareu Nagar
       Sangharsha Samity Nagpur.                                      ... Intervener. 





    Shri A. M. Ghare, Advocate for petitioner. 
    Shri S. M. Puranik, Advocate for respondent.  
    Shri S. M. Bahirwar, Advocate for intervener. 





                                                      CORAM  : A.S.CHANDURKAR, J. 

DATE : August 01, 2016

Oral Judgment :

Rule. Heard finally with consent of learned counsel for the

parties.

The challenge in the present writ petition is to the order passed by

26-J-WP-4990-15 2/5

the Assistant Director, Town Planning Department of the Nagpur Municipal

Corporation under provisions of Section 51 of the Maharashtra Regional and

Town Planning Act, 1956 (for short, the said Act). By the said order, the site

plan pertaining to khasra No.595 dated 08/01/2003 which was duly

sanctioned by the Municipal Corporation has been cancelled.

2. Shri A. M. Ghare, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted

that the impugned order has been passed on the basis of measurement case

dated 02/08/2014. He submitted that the conclusions recorded in the said

measurement case prepared by the City Survey Officer were under challenge

in appeal at the instance of the petitioners before the Superintendent of Land

Records. He submitted that though the said objections have not been

decided, the Assistant Director of Town Planning has accepted the findings

recorded in the measurement case and rejected the site plan.

3. Shri S. M. Puranik, the learned counsel for the respondent No.1

supported the impugned order and submitted that the observations made

therein reflect the correct situation. He submitted that the area in question

is divided between two mouzas and therefore the site plan was rightly

rejected.

Shri S. M. Bahirwar, the learned counsel for the intervener

submitted that in view of the complaint filed by the intervener, the site plan

26-J-WP-4990-15 3/5

has been rejected.

4. Perusal of the impugned order indicates that the conclusions

recorded in the measurement case bearing No.24/2014 have been taken into

consideration while rejecting the site plan. It is not in dispute that the

objections raised by the petitioners to the aforesaid measurement have not

been finally decided and the same are pending before the Superintendent of

Land Records. In that view of the matter the adjudication resulting in

passing of the impugned order cannot be said to be on the basis of the

measurement case that has attained finality. On that ground the impugned

order is liable to be set aside and the same is required to be remanded for

fresh consideration.

5. In view of the aforesaid, the order dated 14/08/2015 passed

under Section 51 of the said Act is set aside. The proceedings are restored

for being considered afresh by the Assistant Director of Town Planning. The

out-come of the proceedings before the Superintendent of Land Records shall

be placed before the said Authority before the objections raised by the

intervener are considered. The intervener is at liberty to appear before the

Assistant Director of Town Planning when the proceedings are taken up for

consideration.

Shri S. M. Puranik for the respondent, on instructions, states that

26-J-WP-4990-15 4/5

an attempt would be made to expedite the proceedings before the

Superintendent of Land Records. If such request is made, the appeal be

decided expeditiously.

Rule is made absolute in aforesaid terms with no order as to costs.

                                                                    
                                                                          JUDGE




                                                                    
                                             
                                            
               
            






    Asmita





     26-J-WP-4990-15                                                                           5/5




                                                                                      
                                            -:  C E R T I F I C A T  E  :- 




                                                             

" I certify that this Judgment/order uploaded is a true and

correct copy of the original signed Judgment/order."

Uploaded by :

Asmita A. Bhandakkar Personal Assistant

Uploaded on :

05/08/2016