Thursday, 14, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Sameer Padmakarrao Mulay And ... vs The State Of Maharashtra And ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 8442 Bom

Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 8442 Bom
Judgement Date : 26 August, 2022

Bombay High Court
Sameer Padmakarrao Mulay And ... vs The State Of Maharashtra And ... on 26 August, 2022
Bench: Mangesh S. Patil, Sandeep V. Marne
                                    1                      WP / 15274 / 2019+



          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                      BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                        WRIT PETITION NO. 15140 OF 2019

1] Sameer S/o. Padmakarrao Mulay,
   Age : 46 years, Occu : Business,
   R/o : "Sahyadri Bungalow", Rachnakar Colony,
   Railway Station Road, Aurangabad
   Aurangabad

2] Ranjeet S/o. Padmakarrao Mulay,
   Age : 50 years, Occu : Business,
   R/o : "Sahyadri Bungalow", Rachnakar Colony,
   Railway Station Road, Aurangabad
   Aurangabad

3] Lata W/o. Padmakarrao Mulay,
   Age : 70 years, Occu : Business,
   R/o : "Sahyadri Bungalow", Rachnakar Colony,
   Railway Station Road, Aurangabad

4] Madhukar S/o. Haribhau Mulay,
   Age : 75 years, Occu : Business,
   R/o : "Shivneri Bungalow", Bansilal Nagar,
   Railway Station Road, Aurangabad
   District - Aurangabad

5] Rahul Vikramchand Sahuji,
   Age : 36 years, Occup. : Agri and Business,
   R/o : N-11, HUDCO, Aurangabad,
   District - Aurnagabad

6] Sau. Amruta W/o Rahul Sahuji,
   Age : 30 years, Occup : Agri and Business,
   R/o : N-11, HUDCO, Aurangabad,
   District - Aurangabad

7] Sau. Anita W/o Sahyog Sahuji,
   Age : 27 years, Occup. : Agri and Business,
   R/o : N-11, HUDCO, Aurangabad
   District - Aurangabad

8] Sau. Priyanka W/o Rishikumar Sahuji,
   Age : 26 years, Occup : Agri and Business,
   R/o : N-11, HUDCO, Aurangabad,
   District - Aurangabad                                     .. Petitioners




 ::: Uploaded on - 26/08/2022                    ::: Downloaded on - 27/08/2022 14:16:29 :::
                                     2                     WP / 15274 / 2019+



         Versus

1] The State of Maharashtra,
   Through Department of Urban Development,
   Mantralaya, Mumbai - 32

2] Principal Secretary,
   Department of Urban Development,
   Mantralaya, Mumbai - 32.

3] The Collector,
   Aurangabad

4] Special Land Acquisition Officer,
   (Special Unit), Aurangabad

5] City and Industrial Development Corporation Ltd.,
   Through its Managing Director,
   Mumbai

6] City and Industrial Development Corporation Ltd.,
   Through its Chief Administrator,
   Udyog Bhavan, Town Centre,
   New Aurangabad - 431 003

7] Administrator, New Towns,
   City Industrial and Development Corporation Ltd.,
   Waluj Mahanagar,
   Aurangabad

8] The Additional Town Planning Officer,
   CIDCO, Waluj Mahanagar,
   Aurangabad                                                 .. Respondents

                                     WITH
                        WRIT PETITION NO. 15274 OF 2019

1] Madhukar S/o. Haribhau Mulay,
   Age : 75 years, Occu : Business,
   R/o : "Shivneri Bungalow", Bansilal Nagar,
   Railway Station Road, Aurangabad
   District - Aurangabad

2] Sameer S/o. Padmakarrao Mulay,
   Age : 46 years, Occu : Business,
   R/o : "Sahyadri Bungalow", Rachnakar Colony,
   Railway Station Road, Aurangabad
   District - Aurangabad




 ::: Uploaded on - 26/08/2022                   ::: Downloaded on - 27/08/2022 14:16:29 :::
                                    3                       WP / 15274 / 2019+


3] Rahul Vikramchand Sahuji,
   Age : 36 years, Occup. : Agri and Business,
   R/o : N-11, HUDCO, Aurangabad,
   District - Aurnagabad

4] Sau. Amruta W/o Rahul Sahuji,
   Age : 30 years, Occup : Agri and Business,
   R/o : N-11, HUDCO, Aurangabad,
   District - Aurangabad

5] Sau. Anita W/o Sahyog Sahuji,
   Age : 27 years, Occup. : Agri and Business,
   R/o : N-11, HUDCO, Aurangabad
   District - Aurangabad

6] Sau. Priyanka W/o Rishikumar Sahuji,
   Age : 26 years, Occup : Agri and Business,
   R/o : N-11, HUDCO, Aurangabad,
   District - Aurangabad                                    .. Petitioners

            Versus

1] The State of Maharashtra,
   Through Department of Urban Development,
   Mantralaya, Mumbai - 32

2] Principal Secretary,
   Department of Urban Development,
   Mantralaya, Mumbai - 32.

3] The Collector,
   Aurangabad

4] Special Land Acquisition Officer,
   (Special Unit), Aurangabad

5] City and Industrial Development Corporation Ltd.,
   Through its Managing Director,
   Mumbai

6] City and Industrial Development Corporation Ltd.,
   Through its Chief Administrator,
   Udyog Bhavan, Town Centre,
   New Aurangabad - 431 003

7] Administrator, New Towns,
   City Industrial and Development Corporation Ltd.,
   Waluj Mahanagar,
   Aurangabad




 ::: Uploaded on - 26/08/2022                    ::: Downloaded on - 27/08/2022 14:16:29 :::
                                        4                     WP / 15274 / 2019+



8] The Additional Town Planning Officer,
   CIDCO, Waluj Mahanagar,
   Aurangabad                                                    .. Respondents

                                          ...
        Advocate for the petitioner in both Wps : Mr. D.P. Palodkar
         AGP for the respondent - State : Mrs. V.N. Patil-Jadhav
 Advocate for respondents no. 5 & 6 : Mr. Vaibhav Deshmukh (In both Wps)
                                      ...

                                CORAM         : MANGESH S. PATIL &
                                                SANDEEP V. MARNE, JJ.
                                RESERVED ON   : 24 AUGUST 2022
                                PRONOUNCED ON : 26 AUGUST 2022


ORDER (MANGESH S. PATIL, J. ) :

Heard both sides.

2. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. Learned AGP

waives service for respondents no. 1 to 4. Mr. Vaibhav Deshmukh

waives service for the respondents nos. 5 and 6. At the joint request of

the parties, the matter is heard finally at the stage of admission.

3. Both these matters which give rise to the same dispute

these are being disposed of finally together. In both these matters, the

petitioners are seeking a declaration regarding lapsing of the

reservation in view of the provision of section 127(2) of the

Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 (MRTP Act).

4. The facts are not in dispute. The respondent - CIDCO

was appointed as Special Planning Authority. A draft development

5 WP / 15274 / 2019+

plan of Waluj notified area was published on 16-04-1992. It was

sanctioned by the State Government on 14-08-2001 under section 31

of the MRTP Act. The writ properties were reserved for playground /

primary and secondary school. No steps were taken by CIDCO for

acquiring the lands covered by the reservations. After expiry of 10

years, the petitioners issued notices under section 127 of the MRTP

Act on 01-08-2017 / 02-08-2017. CIDCO offered development rights in

lieu of monetary compensation. Since no steps in the direction of

acquisitions were taken within 24 months of issuance of notices under

section 127, the petitions have been filed.

5. In catena of judgments of the Supreme Court as also this

Court, it has been held that the consequences of not taking steps in the

direction of the acquisition within the stipulated time is axiomatic and

the reservations would lapse.

6. The stand of the respondents seems to be that the

petitioners are bound to accept the offer given by the CIDCO regarding

acceptance of development rights in lieu of monetary compensation.

7. A Full Bench of this Court in the matter of Shree Vinayak

Builders and Developers Vs. State of Maharashtra and others (Writ

Petition no. 2231 of 2019, Nagpur Bench) by the judgment and order

dated 25-07-2022 has set at naught any debate on this count.

6 WP / 15274 / 2019+

A specific issue as to whether grant of approval or passing of resolution

by the authorities concerned for grant of TDR in lieu of monetary

compensation can be treated as a step for acquisition of land and

commencing of the proceedings for acquisition, as is contemplated

under section 127 of the MRTP Act. The Full Bench has answered the

question to the effect that mere grant of approval or passing of

resolution for offering development rights in lieu of monetary

compensation is not a step for acquisition of land as contemplated

under that provision.

8. Though the issue as to if the offer of development rights

can be regarded as a step in the direction of acquisition as

contemplated under section 127 of the MRTP Act was not involved, the

Supreme Court in the matter of Girnar Traders Vs. State of

Maharashtra; AIR 2007 SC 3180 has emphatically concluded that

nothing short of issuing a declaration under section 6 of the Land

Acquisition Act, 1894 read with section 126(2) of the MRTP Act would

constitute a step in the direction of acquisition as contemplated under

section 127 of the MRTP Act.

9. The respondent - CIDCO had merely offered development

rights in lieu of monetary compensation to the petitioners which would

not bind them unless they would have agreed for it.

                                         7                       WP / 15274 / 2019+


10.            Resultantly,     since       the   consequence       of    lapsing       of

reservation is axiomatic, the petitions are allowed.

11. It is declared that the reservations over the petitioners'

lands have lapsed.

12. Necessary steps be taken for issuing notification for

release of the properties in terms of sub-section (2) of section 127 of

the MRTP Act within four (4) months.

13. Rule is made absolute in the above terms.

      [ SANDEEP V. MARNE ]                            [ MANGESH S. PATIL ]
            JUDGE                                          JUDGE

arp/





 

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter