Mahesh Satyanarayan Khatod vs The State Of Mah And Ors
2016 Latest Caselaw 620 Bom

                                               1                    W.P.No.2064/08

                                            UNREPORTED




                                                                               
                         IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT




                                                       
                                              BOMBAY

                                       BENCH AT AURANGABAD.




                                                      
                                   WRIT PETITION NO.2064 OF 2008



              Mahesh S/o Satyanarayan Khatod,




                                            
              Age 27 years, Occ.Agri and Business,
              R/o 22, Shrihari Nagar, Ganesh
                             
              Colony area, Jalgaon,
              District Jalgaon.             ... Petitioner.
                            
                               Versus

              1. The State of Maharashtra
      

              through its Secretary,
              Urban Development Department,
              Mantralaya, Mumbai-32.
   



              2. The District Collector,
              Jalgaon, Dist.Jalgaon.





              3. The Chief Officer,
              Chalisgaon Municipal Council,
              Chalisgaon, Dist.Jalgaon.

              4. Special Land Acquisition
              Officer, Jalgaon, Dist.





              Jalgaon, Dist.Jalgaon.                    ... Respondents.

                                            ...

              Mr.A.G.Talhar, advocate for the petitioner.
              Mr.A.G.Magare, A.G.P for the State.
              Mr.R.N.Dhorde, Senior advocate for Respondent
              No.3.
                                       ...




    ::: Uploaded on - 19/03/2016                       ::: Downloaded on - 31/07/2016 09:07:42 :::
                                                  2                     W.P.No.2064/08

                                      CORAM : S.V.GANGAPURWALA AND
                                              A.I.S.CHEEMA,JJ.

Date : 15.03.2016.

ORAL JUDGMENT (Per S.V.Gangapurwala,J.)

1. Heard.

2. Mr.Talhar, learned counsel for the

petitioner states that the land of the petitioner

bearing Gat No.351 to the extent of 1 Hectare 76

Ares was reserved in the Development Plan for

housing project to economically weaker section.

The learned counsel submits that the Development

Plan was prepared in the year 1989. As no steps

were taken within a period of 10 years, the

petitioner on 14.2.2006, issued notice U/s 127 of

the Maharashtra Regional Town Planning Act. The

learned counsel submits that declaration U/s 6

was not issued within a period of six (6) months

from the service of notice, as such the

acquisition stands lapsed. The learned counsel

relies on the judgment of the Apex Court in the

case of "Girnar Traders Vs. State of Maharashtra

and others" reported in (2011) 3 Supreme Court

Cases 1.

3. Mr.Dhorde, learned Senior advocate for

Respondent Municipal Council submits that the

Municipal Council had passed a Resolution and had

forwarded proposal to the concerned authority for

taking up acquisition proceedings. As such

necessary compliance was made. The learned

Senior counsel further submits that in the year

2013 Draft Revised Development Plan was prepared

and has been ig submitted to the Government for

sanction. The same is awaiting sanction. As such

the reservation does not stand lapsed.

4. We have heard learned A.G.P also.

5. It is not disputed that the land of the

petitioner was reserved in the final Development

Plan in the year 1989 for housing project meant

for economically backward classes. The petitioner

issued notice U/s 127 of the MRTP Act on

14.2.2006. The same is served upon the

Respondent Municipal Council. It is also not

disputed that till date no declaration U/s 6 of

the Land Acquisition Act, read with Section 126

of the MRTP Act, has been issued pursuant to the

said notice in respect of the writ land. In view

of the judgment of the Apex Court in a case of

"Girnar Traders Vs State of Maharashtra and

others" referred supra, the reservation stands

lapsed. The draft revised Development Plan is

not yet sanctioned. Moreover, the same would not

have any relevance in view of the judgment of the

Apex Court in a case of "Godrej & Boyce

Manufacturing Co.Ltd. Vs State of Maharashtra and

others" reported in 2015 (2) Bom.C.R.354.

6. In light of the above, Rule is made

absolute in terms of prayer clause C-1. No

costs.

                       Sd/-                                     Sd/-
                (A.I.S.CHEEMA,J.)                      (S.V.GANGAPURWALA,J.)





              asp/office/wp2064.08