Bombay High Court
Sawan S/O Nandkumar Bhatewara And ... vs The State Of Maharashtra, Thr. The ... on 7 May, 2025
Author: Nitin W. Sambre
Bench: Nitin W. Sambre
2025:BHC-NAG:5124-DB
930-wp-6239-24.odt
1/8
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
WRIT PETITION NO.6239 OF 2024
1. Sawan Nandkumar Bhatewara, Age 39 years, Petitioner
Occup. Business, R/o 1101, Court Royal
Khare Town, Behind Batukbhai Jewellers,
Dharampeth, Nagpur-440010
2. Pravin Shri. Premjibhai Thakkar, Age 46
years, Occup.Business, R/o Hariom Villa,
Near KDK College, Nandanvan, Wathoda,
Nagpur-440008.
-Versus-
1. The State of Maharashtra through the
Secretary Urban Development Department,
Mantralaya, Mumbai.
2. The Nagpur Municipal Corporation City of
Nagpur, through its Commissioner, Nagpur
Municipal Corporation, Civil Line, Nagpur.
3. The Nagpur Improvement Trust, Through its
Chairman, Opp. NIT Swimming Pool, North
Respondents
Ambazari Road,Nagpur.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr.Harish Dangre a/w Mr.G.K.Mundada, Adv for the Petitioner.
Mr.Ṣ.M.Ghodeswar, AGP for respondent No.1
Mr. Kuldip Mahallae, Adv. for respondent No.2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CORAM : NITIN W. SAMBRE AND
MRS. VRUSHALI V. JOSHI, JJ.
DATE : 07/05/2025.
ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: Vrushali V. Joshi, J.)
1) Heard.
Kavita
930-wp-6239-24.odt
2) Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. By consent of the
learned Counsel for the parties, the Writ Petition is heard finally.
3) The petitioners are seeking relief of declaration that the land
owned by them stands lapsed under Section 127 of the Maharashtra
Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 (for short MRTP Act").
4) The petitioners are owners and persons interested in land
bearing Survey No/Khasra No.16/1 of Mouza Wathoda area
admeasuring 1.26 Hectares (12,600 sq.mts.), Occupancy Class-1 rights,
Patwari Halka No.34/A, City Survey No.213, Sheet No.585/26,
Tq.Nagpur Dist.Nagpur.(hereinafter referred to as the said land). The
petitioners purchased the said land from one Shobha Ashok Balpande,
on 21/05/2019 by registered sale deed. The Revised Final Development
Plan of Excluded Part of Nagpur City was sanctioned by the State
Government of Maharashtra and came into force vide notification
No.TPS-2400-1628-CR-200-2000UD-9 in which the said land was
kept reserved for the purpose of Park vide reservation No. EP-101(ME-
59). The said land is forming part of Green Belt Control Scheme and in
the GR-2002 Green Belt Control Scheme it is enlisted under the
excluded seven schemes. The respondent No.3 is an appropriate
authority responsible for acquisition and development of said
reservation under the Excluded Plan.
Kavita
930-wp-6239-24.odt
5) The petitioners issued purchase notice under Section 127 of the
MRTP Act to the respondents on 16/09/2022. By the said notice they
called upon the respondents to purchase the said land within the
statutory period of twenty four months. Said notice was served along
with the documents such as Sale Deed, Correction Deed, 7/12 Extract,
Measurement Sheet, and Part Plan of Development Plan. In reply to
the said notice, under Section 127 of the MRTP Act, respondent No.2
issued a letter on 27/09/2022 and informed the petitioners that for the
said reservation respondent No.3 i.e. NIT is the appropriate authority.
The petitioner has issued the copy of the said notice to the respondent
No.3 also. In response to the notice under Section 127, the respondent
No.3 issued a letter to the petitioners offering Transferable
Development Rights (for short TDR). The petitioners issued reply to
the said notice on 28/01/2023 and rejected the offer of TDR and
requested for the monetary compensation of said land.
6) Respondent No.3 on 24/01/2024 issued a letter to City
Survey Officer, informing that Chairman, NIT that they have given
temporary sanction for the TDR proposal for the said land.
Respondent No.3 further directed City Survey Officer to submit the
measurement sheet of the said land in the office of respondent No.3 and
directed the Divisional Officer to take possession of the said land and
Kavita
930-wp-6239-24.odt
submit the possession receipt in the office of respondent No.3.
7) The statutory period of twenty four months for the notice under
Section 127 of the MRTP Act had lapsed on 15/09/2024. On
27/09/2024, petitioners issued a letter to respondent No.3 and
informed that on 28/01/2023, the petitioners through their counsel
already rejected the TDR compensation offer for the said land owned by
them. The petitioners by the said letter withdraw the willingness for the
TDR compensation and requested to initiate appropriate proceedings as
per Section 127 of MRTP Act.
8) The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners has stated that
according to Section 127 of the MRTP Act, "if any land reserved
allotted or designated for any purpose specified in any plan under this
act is not acquired by agreement within 10 years from the date on which
a final regional plan, or final development Plan comes into force or if a
declaration under sub-section (2)or (4) of section 126 is not published
in the official gazette within such period, the owner or any person
interested in the land may serve the notice". This provision of Section
127 of MRTP Act has been interpreted by the Hon'ble Apex Court to
mean that within the aforesaid period of twenty-four months,
declaration u/s 19 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency
in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 ("Act
Kavita
930-wp-6239-24.odt
of 2013" for short) is required to be issued and published in order to
take steps or for acquisition to commence. In the present matter notice
under Section 127 was received on 16/09/2022 and the statutory
period of the twenty four months came to an end on 15/09/2024.
Although the respondent no.3 is an appropriate authority as per the
Table of Reservation Details and as per the GR of 2021, however, as per
Section 26 of MRTP act, for this Respondent No.3 is the planning
authority and Respondent No.3 had not acted as per the statutory
requirements of MRTP Act.
9) By the end of the statutory time even till the date of filing of
the petition, no notification under Section 126 (2) and (4) of the MRTP
Act r/w Section 19 of the Act of 2013 has been issued or published.
Thus, it is clear that no steps for acquisition of the land owned by the
petitioners have been taken within the statutory period of twenty four
months and thus the reservation has lapsed. The petitioners have
therefore, filed this writ petition under Section 127 of the MRTP Act.
10) The respondent No.3 has filed the reply and denied the contents
in the petition. The respondent has specifically submitted that the
petitioners have accepted the offer to accept the compensation in the
form of TDR vide their earlier communication and the respondent has
also granted temporary sanction for grant of TDR subject to condition
Kavita
930-wp-6239-24.odt
that the measurement sheet shall be procured from the City Survey
Department. However, the petitioners have changed their stand and
have refused to accept the compensation of the land in the form of
TDR. In this backdrop, the respondents pressed to dismiss the petition.
11) Heard the learned counsel appearing for the respective parties
and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for the State.
12) We have gone through the submissions made by both the
parties. On perusal of the section 127(1) of MRTP Act, it is clear that
petitioners have satisfied the condition of serving of notice on the
respondents along with documents showing their title or interest in the
said land as the land was not acquired by agreement within ten years
from the date on which final development plan came into force. The
respondents ought to have acquired the land or taken steps towards
acquisition within 24 months i.e. before 15/09/2024.
13) The petitioners have relied on the judgment of this Court in
Writ Petition No. 4535 of 2019 ( Pagariya Realtors V. State of
Maharashtra) decided on 09/05/2024, wherein this Court has relied on
the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Chhabildas V. State of
Maharashtra and ors. [(2018)2 SCC 784: (AIR 2018 SC (supp)6] and
Mohandas and ors. Vs.State of Maharashtra and ors [2020 SCC OnLine
SC 97. In the aforesaid judgment, the Apex Court at length discussed
Kavita
930-wp-6239-24.odt
the steps towards the acquisitions and the same view has been reiterated
in all the subsequent judgments of the Apex Court. It is also clearly
stated that merely offering TDR would not be in compliance of Section
127 of the Act of 1966 and it is not obligatory on the petitioners to
accept the TDR in lieu of the compensation.
14) The Full Bench judgment of this Court in Vinayak Builders
and developers, Nagpur Vs.State of Maharashtra and ors [2022(4)
Mh.L.J. 739:(AIR Online 2022 Bom. 435] relied by the petitioners has
held that mere grant of approval or passing of the resolution by the
Authorities concerned, for grant of TDR/FSI in lieu of monetary
compensation is not a step towards the acquisition of land and the land
owner cannot be compelled to accept the same. The full Bench has also
considered the issue of what constitutes a step commencing the
acquisition proceeding elaborately.
15) As a consequence of above discussion, we deem it appropriate
to allow the present writ petition. It is hereby declared that the
reservation of the lands of the petitioners bearing Survey No/Khasra
No.16/1 of Mouza Wathoda area ad-measuring 1.26 Hectares (12,600
sq.mts.), Occupancy Class-1 rights, Patwari Halka No.34/A, City
Survey No.213, Sheet No.585/26, Tq.Nagpur Dist.Nagpur has lapsed
and the lands are free for the purpose of development as is otherwise
Kavita
930-wp-6239-24.odt
permissible to the adjacent land under the development plan. The
respondent No.1 is directed to notify the lapsing of the reservation on
the aforesaid lands by notifying the same by an order published in the
official gazette as per section 127(2) of the Act of 1966 within eight
weeks from the date of producing the copy of this judgment.
16) Rule is made absolute in the aforesaid terms. No costs.
(MRS.VRUSHALI V. JOSHI, J) (NITIN W. SAMBRE, J)
Signed by: Kavita P Tayade
Designation: PA To Honourable Judge
Date: 13/05/2025 10:49:24 Kavita
