Allowed

Jugalkishor Govardhandas Mundhada v. State of Maharashtra Thr. Its Secretary, Revenue Dept. Mantralaya Mumbai and 5 Others

Bombay HC25 Oct 2013WP/2760/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition challenged the non-acquisition of reserved land notified as a garden. The Court held that due to failure to take acquisition steps within one year of a Section 127 notice, the land stands dereserved.

What did the court decide?

The land bearing Survey No. 108/1A reserved for Garden stands dereserved and is open for development as permissible for adjoining land.

Jugalkishor Govardhandas Mundhada Vs State of… — Municipal and Town Planning | Bombay HC (2013)

¶1

1/4

¶2

wp2760.13.odt

¶3

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

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO.2760 OF 2013

¶5

PETITIONER:

¶6

Jugalkishor Govardhandas Mundhada, aged about 47 years, Occu-Business, Resident of Tilak Square, Dhamangaon Railway, Tahsil Dhamangaon, District Amravati.

¶7

-VERSUS-

¶8

RESPONDENTS : 1 State of Maharashtra, Through its Secretary, Revenue Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai-32.

¶9

2 The Municipal Corporation, Dhamangaon (Railway), through its Chief Officer, Dhamangaon Railway, Dhamangaon, Amravati.

¶10

3 The Assistant Director of Town Planning, Amravati, Office at Tatte Building, Behind Collector Officer, Amravati.

¶11

4 The Development Authority, Municipal Corporation, Dhamangaon (Railway), District Amravati.

¶12

5 The Chief Executive Officer, Municipal Corporation, Dhamangaon (Railway), District Amravati.

¶13

6 Director of Town Planning, Maharashtra State, Office at Central Offices, Pune 411 001.

¶14

Mr. Alok Daga, Advocate for the Petitioner. Mr. M. G. Rathi, Advocate for the respondent Nos.2 & 5. Mrs. R. Deshpande, Assistant Government Pleader for Respondent Nos.1, 3 and 6.

¶15

CORAM: SMT.VASANTI A. NAIK AND

¶16

A.S. CHANDURKAR,JJ.

¶17

DATED: 25TH OCTOBER, 2013.

¶18

wp2760.13.odt 2/4

¶19

ORAL JUDGMENT : (Per A. S. Chandurkar, J)

¶20

Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard finally with the consent of the parties.

¶21

Heard Shri Daga, the learned Counsel for the petitioner, Mrs. Deshpande, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for respondent Nos.1, 3 & 6 and Shri M. G. Rathi, the learned Counsel for respondent Nos.2 & 5.

¶22

The petitioner in the present writ petition has sought release of the land bearing Survey No.108/1A admeasuring 49R at Mouza Dhamangaon that was reserved for the purposes of Garden in the development plan vide Notification dated 19-4-1990. According to the petitioner, as the aforesaid land was not acquired by the Respondent No.2, a notice under the provisions of Section 127 of the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 was duly issued to the planning authority on 28-12-2011. The same was duly served. However, within the statutory period as prescribed by Section 127 of the said Act, no steps of acquisition of the said land were taken by the said authority. Hence, the petitioner has approached this Court seeking aforesaid reliefs.

¶23

It is not in dispute that notice under Section 127 of the said

¶24

wp2760.13.odt 3/4

¶25

Act was issued on 28-12-2011 and the same was duly received by the respondent no.2 – Municipal Corporation. According to the respondent No.2, the petitioner was called upon to give his consent to sell the said land at the Government rate. However, the petitioner was insisting for being paid market rate for the said land. According to the respondent Nos.2 & 5, the aforesaid steps were taken in the said matter and hence, the land could not be dereserved under the provisions of Section 127 of the said Act.

¶26

The respondent Nos. 3 and 6 have filed affidavit on record in which it has been stated that the planning authority has not submitted any proposal for acquiring the aforesaid land within the stipulated time. On the contrary, the said respondents had sought information from the Municipal Corporation as regards steps taken by it for acquiring said land. It is, therefore, clear that no steps as contemplated by the provisions of Section 127 of the said Act have been taken in the matter of acquiring the land in question within a period of one year from issuance of notice under Section 127 of the said Act.

¶27

In view of the aforesaid facts and the settled legal position that has been reiterated by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in its judgment in the case of Shrirampur Municipal Council Vs. Satyabhamabai Dawkher reported in 2013(5) Mh.L.J., 492 (SC) , we declare that the land in question stands dereserved on account of failure to take

¶28

wp2760.13.odt 4/4

¶29

necessary steps for acquisition of the said land within a period of one year from receipt of notice under Section 127 of the said Act. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed and it is held that the land bearing Survey No.108/1-A to the extent of 49R, that was reserved for Garden stands dereserved as the same has not been acquired in terms of Section 127 of the said Act. It is, therefore, open for the petitioner to develop the aforesaid land as is permissible with regard to the adjoining land. Writ Petition accordingly stands allowed with no order as to costs.

¶30

JUDGE JUDGE

¶31

//MULEY/ /

Jugalkishor Govardhandas Mundhada v. State of Maharashtra Thr. Its Secretary, Revenue Dept. Mantralaya Mumbai and 5 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jugalkishor Govardhandas Mundhada v. State of Maharashtra Thr. Its Secretary, Revenue Dept. Mantralaya Mumbai and 5 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The Commissioner of Income Tax-I, Nagpur Vs Shri Sanjay Ishwarlal Ranka

The Commissioner of Income Tax-Iv Vs Shri Vijay T. Dangre

The Commissioner of Income Tax-Iv Vs Shri Vijay T. Dangre

Maharshtra Rajya Padvidhar Prathmik Shaikshak Sabah, Buldhana through Its Secretary, 10 Others Vs State of Maharshtra, through Its Additional Chief Secretary, Mumbai and 2 Others

Shri Suresh Balu Rathod and Ors. Vs Gramudhar Vidya Prasarak Shikshan Sanstha Thr. Its Sec. and Ors.

National Womens Welfare Society Darwha Dist. Yavatmal through President S.P. Mazoor Ahemad Khan Vs Joint Charity Commissioner Amravati and Others