Yogesh S/O Vitthalrao Pande vs The State Of Maharashtra,Thr. ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 10215 Bom

                                                                                  10 wp 6146.22.odt jud.
                                                       1

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                            BENCH AT NAGPUR, NAGPUR.
                                       ...

WRIT PETITION NO. 6146/2022

* Yogesh S/o Vitthalrao Pande, Aged about 64 years, Occupation:

         Business & Agriculture, R/o Murti
         Road, Dhantoli, Katol
         District Nagpur                                                              ..PETITIONER

                                      versus

1)       State of Maharashtra
         Through its Principal Secretary
         Urban Development Department
         Mantralaya, Mumbai-32.

2)     The Municipal Council, Katol
       Through its Chief Officer,
       Katol, Dist.Nagpur.                                                  ..        RESPONDENTS

..................................................................................................................

Mr M.P. Khajanchi, Advocate for petitioner Ms. N.P. Mehta, Asst.Govt. Pleader for respondent no.1 Mr. M.I.Dhatrak, Advocate for respondent no.2 ................................................................................................................

CORAM: SUNIL B. SHUKRE & G.A. SANAP JJ DATED : 04.10.2022.

ORAL JUDGMENT: (PER SUNIL B.SHUKRE, J.)

1. Heard Shri Khajanchi, learned counsel for the petitioner, Ms

N.P. Mehta, learned AGP who appears by waiving notice for respondent

No.1 and Shri M.I. Dhatrak, learned counsel who appears by waiving

notice for respondent No.2.

10 wp 6146.22.odt jud.

2. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by

consent.

3. The reply filed by respondent no.2-Municipal Council, Katol

is categorical. In Paragraph 3, it is stated that the issue in question

was taken up in the General Body meeting of the Municipal Council,

Katol as subject No.70 on 26.05.2022 and in this meeting, after

discussion, it was unanimously resolved that the subject land which is

currently reserved for the purposes of shopping Centre, Town Hall,

Primary School, Play Ground, Garden and 12 metre D.P. Road should not

be acquired and this fact should be intimated to the land-owner. This

reply is well-supported by copy of the Resolution bearing No.70/2022

which is at page 21.

4. It is, thus, clear that the subject land is not proposed to be

acquired by the Municipal Council-respondent no.2, under Section 126

of the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966. Besides,

there is no dispute about receipt of notice by respondent no.2 which is a

purchase notice by respondent no.2, u/s. 127 of the MRTP Act. These

facts would entail this Court to allow this petition by issuing necessary

directions.

10 wp 6146.22.odt jud.

5. The Writ Petition is allowed in terms of prayer clauses (a) &

(b). We direct that lapsing of the land shall be published accordingly by

seeking necessary approvals within three months from the date of this

order.

6. Rule in above terms. No costs.

                                        JUDGE                          JUDGE




                     manisha




Signed By:MANISHA ALOK
SHEWALE


Signing Date:04.10.2022 17:11