Bombay High Court
Pravin Balkrishnaji Maloo And ... vs The State Of Maharashtra Through ... on 26 August, 2016
Bench: V.A. Naik
1 wp6501.15
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR
WRIT PETITION NO.6501 OF 2015
1) Pravin Balkrishnaji Maloo,
age 50 years, occupation :
agriculturist and business,
r/o Camp, Amravati, Taluq
and District Amravati.
2) Datta Fertilizers and Chemicals
Pvt. Ltd., through its Director
Ashok Ratanlalji Soni, age 56
years, occupation : agriculturist
and business, r/o Dattachhaya,
Janardhan peth, Amravati. ... Petitioners
- Versus -
1) The State of Maharashtra, through
the Secretary, Urban Development
Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai.
2) The Municipal Corporation of City of
Amravati, through its Commissioner,
Amravati Municipal Corporation,
Rajkamal Chowk, Amravati.
3) Assistant Director of Town Planning,
Municipal Corporation, Amravati.
4) The Collector, Amravati,
Taluq and District Amravati. ... Respondents
-----------------
Shri G.K. Mundhada, Advocate for petitioner.
Shri S.M. Ukey, Additional Government Pleader for respondent nos.1
and 4.
Shri S. Saoji, Advocate for respondent nos.2 and 3.
----------------
::: Uploaded on - 29/08/2016 ::: Downloaded on - 31/08/2016 00:19:01 :::
2 wp6501.15
CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A NAIK AND
KUM. INDIRA JAIN, JJ.
DATED : AUGUST 26, 2016
ORAL JUDGMENT (PER SMT. VASANTI A NAIK
, J.) :
Rule. The rule is made returnable forthwith. The writ
petition is heard finally at the stage of admission with the consent of the
learned Counsel for the parties. ig
2) By this writ petition, the petitioners seek a declaration that the
reservation of their land vide Reservation Nos.445, 446, 447 and 448 for
Garden, Primary School and Maternity Home in respect of Survey No.8,
admeasuring 2 hectares 63 R of Mouza Mahajanpura, Taluq and District
Amravati has lapsed in view of the provisions of Section 127 of the
Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 and they are free to
develop such land in the manner permissible in the case of adjacent land
under the relevant Development Plan.
3) The petitioners claim to be the owners of land bearing Survey
No.8 to the extent of 2 hectares 63 R of Mouza Mahajanpura, Taluq and
District Amravati. The land of the petitioner was reserved for Garden,
Primary School and Maternity Home vide Reservation Nos. 445, 446, 447
and 448 by the Development Plan dated 25/2/1993. Since nothing was
3 wp6501.15
done by the respondents in the matter of acquisition of land for more than
10 years, the petitioners served a notice dated 26/5/2011 on the
respondent nos.2 and 3, that was received by the respondent nos.2 and 3
on the same date. It is the case of the petitioners that despite expiry of
one year from the date of receipt of the notice, respondent nos.2 and 3
have not taken any effective steps for the acquisition of the land.
4) Shri Saoji, learned Counsel for the respondent nos.2 and 3,
has tendered an affidavit-in-reply of the respondent nos.2 and 3 in the
Court today. The same is accepted on record.
5) It is stated on behalf of respondent nos.2 and 3 that after
notice under Section 127 of the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning
Act, 1966 was served on them, they informed the petitioners that if they
file an appropriate application, respondent nos.2 and 3 would try to pay
the compensation by way of Transferable Development Rights. It is,
however, fairly stated that no effective steps could be taken by the
respondent nos.2 and 3 for the acquisition of land of the petitioners due to
shortage of funds. It is submitted that the respondent nos.2 and 3
disclosed their intention to acquire the land to the State Government, but
the effective steps could not be taken due to lack of funds. It is admitted
that no notification under Section 19 of the Right to Fair Compensation
and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement
Act, 2013 is issued till date.
4 wp6501.15
6) On hearing the learned Counsel for the parties, we find that a
case is made out by the petitioners for grant of declaration as prayed. In
view of the provisions of Section 127 of the Maharashtra Regional and
Town Planning Act, 1966, it was necessary for the respondent nos.2 and 3
to issue notification under Section 19 of the Right to Fair Compensation
and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement
Act, 2013. Admittedly, no notification under Section 19 of the said Act of
2013 is issued in respect of the land of the petitioners till date. In view of
the provisions of Section 127 of the Maharashtra Regional and Town
Planning Act, 1966, reservation of the land of the petitioners for the
Garden, Primary School and Maternity Home is deemed to have lapsed
and the petitioners would be free to develop the land in the manner
permissible in the case of adjacent land, under the relevant Development
Plan.
7) For the reasons recorded hereinabove, the writ petition is
allowed. It is hereby declared that the reservation of the land of the
petitioners vide Reservation Nos.445, 446, 447 and 448 has lapsed under
Section 127 of the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966
and the petitioners are free to develop the land owned by them in the
manner permissible in the case of adjacent land, under the relevant
Development Plan.
5 wp6501.15
8) Rule is made absolute in the aforesaid terms with no order as
to costs.
JUDGE JUDGE
khj
6 wp6501.15
CERTIFICATE
I certify that this order uploaded is a true and correct copy
of original signed order.
Uploaded by : Uploaded on :
Kamal H. Jeswani
Private Secretary
ig 29/08/2016
