Allowed

Vijay Tarachand Kataria and Others v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Bombay HC25 Nov 2014WP/2076/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners challenged the denial of dereservation of land reserved for a Primary School. The Court held that the Municipal Council's failure to utilize the land despite receipt of notice constituted harassment, causing the reservation to lapse.

What did the court decide?

Land G.No.906 admeasuring 23 ares was declared dereserved as the reservation had lapsed and the rule made absolute.

Vijay Tarachand Kataria and Others Vs the State… — Municipal and Town Planning | Bombay HC (2014)

¶1

wp207614.odt

¶2

{1}

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO.2076 OF 2014

¶5

1 Vijay s/o Tarachand Kataria, age: 65 years, Occ: Business; 2 Jawahar s/o Tarachand Kataria, age: 61 years, Occ: Business; 3 Rajendra s/o Tarachand Kataria, age: 58 years, Occ: Business; 4 Surendra s/o Tarachand Kataria, age: 54 years, Occ: Business; 5 Chandrakant s/o Tarachand Kataria, age: 52 years, Occ: Business; All R/o Shrigonda, Tq. Shrigonda, District Ahmednagar. Petitioners

¶6

Versus 1 The State of Maharashtra, through its Secretary, Urban Development Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai. 2 The Assistant Director, Town Planning, Near Akashwani, Ahmednagar, District Ahmednagar. 3 The Chief Officer, Municipal Council, Shrigonda, Tq.Shrigonda, District Ahmednagar. Respondents

¶7

Mr.M.R.Sonawane, advocate for petitioners Mr.D.R.Kale, A.G.P. for Respondents No.1 & 2. Mr.P.N.Khedkar, advocate for Respondent No.3.

¶8

wp207614.odt

¶9

{2}

¶10

CORAM : B.P.DHARMADHIKARI &

¶11

A.M.BADAR, JJ.

¶12

DATE : 25^th November, 2014

¶13

ORAL JUDGMENT (Per B.P.Dharmadhikari, J.):

¶14

1 Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard finally by consent of learned Counsel for respective parties.

¶15

2 Service of notice under Section 127 of the Maharashtra Regional & Town Planning Act, 1966 by petitioners and expiry of period of one year therefrom is not disputed. The only defence raised by Respondent No.3- Municipal Council (Planning Authority) is that Reservation No.4 on the land of petitioners for Primary School was meant for Zilla Parishad Primary School. However, the facts show otherwise. Resolution in respect of said land is passed by the Municipal Council on 09.05.2013. Subject No.8, in that meeting, expressly refers to notice under Section 127 of the M.R.T.P. Act sent by petitioners. After receipt of notice from petitioners, reservation for Primary School is being shifted to Zilla Parishad. It is not case of the Municipal Council that at any point of time, prior to receipt of such notice, the Municipal Council has asked Zilla Parishad to develop the site.

¶16

3 In this situation, we find substance in the contention of advocate Shri Sonawane, that because of its inability to acquire the land, deliberately and only to harass petitioners, such step has been taken and Resolution has been passed. Accordingly, by adhering to the judgments of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the mater of State of Maharashtra Vs. Bhakti Vedanta Book Trust & others ; reported in 2013 (4) SCC 676; and in the matter of

¶17

wp207614.odt

¶18

{3}

¶19

Prakash R. Gupta Vs. Lonavala Municipal Council and others , reported in 2009 (1) SCC 514; as also the judgments/orders of this Court in (1) W.P.No.112 of 2011, decided on 09.08.2014; (2) W.P.No.1891 of 2010, decided on 21.07.2010; (3) W.P.No.1505 of 2013, decided on 30^th July, 2013, petitioners' contention is accepted. Accordingly, it is declared that land G.No.906, admeasuring 23 ares is dereserved as reservation vide Site No.4 has lapsed.

¶20

4 Rule is made absolute in terms of prayer clause {C}. No costs.

¶21

A.M.BADAR JUDGE

¶22

B.P.DHARMADHIKARI

¶23

JUDGE

¶24

adb/wp207614

Vijay Tarachand Kataria and Others v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vijay Tarachand Kataria and Others v. the State of Maharashtra and 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

Kishor Prabhakarrao Sonde Vs the State of Mah and Ors.

Shri Sopan Kerba Hingole Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Sonaji Vitthal Giram Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Vijay Kumar Ratnchand Bora Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Sakharam Sadu Parkhe and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

The Director General of Police State of Maharashtra and Others Vs Nitin Rajendrakumar Kunkulol and Another