Bombay High Court
Shri Suresh S/O Ramchandra ... vs State Of Maharashtra Thr. Its ... on 10 June, 2016
Bench: B.P. Dharmadhikari
Judgment wp3100.15
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
WRIT PETITION No. 3100 OF 2015.
1. Shri Suresh s/o Ramchandra Ramteke,
Aged 52 years, Occupation - Service,
resident of Plot no.136, New Thaware
Colony, Jaripatka, Nagpur - 14.
2. Shri Vinod s/o Shankar Barde,
Aged 60 years, Occupation - Retired,
resident of at Post Tah. Bramhapuri,
District Chandrapur. ....PETITIONERS.
VERSUS
1. State of Maharashtra,
through its Principal Secretary,
Urban Development Deaprtment,
Mantralaya, Mumbai - 400 032.
2. The Chief Executive Officer,
Nagar Parishad, Bramhapuri,
Tahsil Bramhapuri, District Chandrapur.
3. The President of Nagar Parishad,
Bramhapuri, Tahsil Bramhapuri,
District Chandrapur.
4. Municipal Counsel, Bramhapuri,
though its Chief Officer, Bramhapuri. ....RESPONDENTS
.
::: Uploaded on - 14/06/2016 ::: Downloaded on - 30/07/2016 04:54:26 :::
Judgment wp3100.15
2
-----------------------------------
Mr. H.B, Bargat, Advocate for Petitioners.
Ms. P. Rane, A.G.P. for Respondent No.1.
Mr. R.J. Kankale, Advocate for Respondent Nos.2 to 4.
------------------------------------
CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI &
KUM. INDIRA JAIN, JJ.
DATED : JUNE 10, 2016.
ORAL JUDGMENT. (Per B.P. Dharmadhikari, J)
Heard learned Counsel for the parties. By their consent and
considering the nature of controversy, Rule is issued in the matter and the
same is made returnable forthwith.
2. The petitioners seek declaration of lapsing of reservation on
Survey Nos. 404/K and 404/1A of Mouza Bramhapuri, Tahsil and District
Chandrapur.
3. Respondents have failed their reply and only defence raised by
them is absence of funds for paying compensation. Shri Kankale, learned
Judgment wp3100.15
Counsel appearing for respondent nos. 2 to 4, submits that for last about
three years, there was no regular Chief Officer with the Municipal Council,
and hence no decision could be taken.
4. Shri Bargat, learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that
provisions of Section 127[1] of the Maharashtra Regional and Town
Planning Act, 1966 needs to be complied with and hence, reservation is
deemed to have been lapsed. He submits that the issue is covered by the
judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court reported at 2013 [5] Mh.L.J. 492
(Shrirampur Municipal Council .vrs. Satyabhamabai Bhimaji Dwakher
and others) and (2013) 4 SCC 676 (State of Maharashtra v. Bhakti
Vedanta Book Trust).
5. Service of a valid notice by the petitioners, receipt thereof by the
Municipal Council, expiry of period of one year after service thereof, are not
in dispute. The notice is dated 14.01.2013 and it is received by the inward
section of the Municipal Council on the very same day. Period of one year
therefrom has expired on 14.01.2014. Thus, on that day, reservation on land
mentioned supra, as prescribed in the Development Plan has lapsed.
6. Accordingly, we declare that from 14.01.2014, reservation on
Judgment wp3100.15
above mentioned survey numbers have lapsed and those lands have become
available for their use by petitioners for the purpose of which the lands,
adjacent to it, can be developed.
7. Writ Petition is thus, partly allowed and disposed of. Rule is made
absolute in the aforesaid terms, with no order as to costs.
JUDGE JUDGE
Rgd.
