Allowed

Shashimohan Sugamchand Tapadiya and 2 Others v. the State of Maharashtra through the Secretary Urban Development Department, Mumbai and Others

Bombay HC16 Feb 2018WP/3533/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court declared that the reservation of specific land for educational purposes lapsed under Section 127 of the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act because the State failed to acquire it within ten years. The petitioners are thus entitled to develop the land according to the final development plan.

What did the court decide?

Declared that the reservation of the land for educational purposes has lapsed and the petitioners are free to develop the land as permissible under the final development plan.

Shashimohan Sugamchand Tapadiya and 2 Others Vs the State of… — Land Acquisition | Bombay HC (2018)

¶1

WP3533-17

¶2

¶3

FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No . IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO. 3533/2017

¶5

(SHASHIMOHAN SUGAMCHAND TAPADIYA & OTHERS VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & OTHERS)

¶6

¶7

Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders

¶8

- - - - Shri G.K. Mundhada, counsel for the petitioners. Shri B.M. Lonare, A.G.P. for the R-1, 2, 4 & 5. Shri D.M. Kale, counsel for the R-3.

¶9

CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A NAIK AND A.D. UPADHYE, JJ. DATE : FEBRUARY 16, 2018.

¶10

By this writ petition, the petitioners seek a declaration that the reservation of the land of the petitioner in Survey No.123 admeasuring 1 Hectare 80 R in Mouza Khamgaon for Primary School, Garden and Playground has lapsed in view of the provisions of Section 127 of the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act and the petitioners would be free to develop the land as is permissible to the adjacent land, as per the relevant final development plan.

¶11

The petitioners claim to be the owners of the land admeasuring 1 Hectare 80 R in Survey No.123 in Mouza Khamgaon that was reserved for Primary School, Garden and Playground as per the revised final development plan that came into force for Khamgaon town on 01.11.1993. Since the land of the petitioners was not acquired by private agreement by the respondents within ten years from the date of publication of the final development plan on 01.11.1993, the petitioners served a purchase notice dated 18.06.2004 on the respondents on 21.06.2004. A proposal was sent by the Municipal Council for the acquisition of the land and the

¶12

WP3533-17

¶13

¶14

State Government directed the Municipal Council to deposit a sum of Rs.55,76,000/- towards part of the compensation payable for the acquisition of the land. The Municipal Council did not deposit the said amount and no further steps were taken by the Municipal Council for the acquisition of the land. After the land of the petitioners was deemed to have lapsed under the provisions of Section 127(1) of the Act, the petitioners made an application under Section 44 of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code for permission to develop the land and the said application was rejected. It appears that an appeal is filed by the petitioners against the said order.

¶15

In the admitted set of facts, it is apparent that the reservation of the land of the petitioners has lapsed in view of the provisions of Section 127(1) of the Act as the respondents have not acquired the land within ten years from the date of issuance of the final development plan on 01.11.1993 and effective steps are not taken within twelve months from the date of service of the purchase notice on the Municipal Council on 21.06.2004. Since effective steps were not taken by the respondents for the acquisition of the land and the Section 6 notification was not issued, the reservation of the land of the petitioners is deemed to have lapsed under the provisions of Section 127(1) of the Act. When the petitioners sought for permission under Section 44 of the Act, it was necessary for the authorities to consider this aspect of the matter. It cannot be said that the reservation of the land of the petitioners cannot be said to have lapsed as the petitioners had applied for permission for development of the land under Section 44 of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code. A permission for development could have been secured even after the lapsing of the reservation.

¶16

WP3533-17

¶17

¶18

Hence, for the reasons aforesaid, the writ petition is allowed. It is hereby declared that the reservation of the land of the petitioners in Survey No.123 admeasuring 1 Hectare 80 R of Mouza Khamgaon for Primary School, Garden and Playground has lapsed in view of the provisions of Section 127(1) of the Act and the petitioners would be free to develop the land, as is permissible for the adjacent land as per the relevant final development plan.

¶19

Order accordingly. No costs.

¶20

JUDGE JUDGE

¶21

APTE

Shashimohan Sugamchand Tapadiya and 2 Others v. the State of Maharashtra through the Secretary Urban Development Department, Mumbai and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shashimohan Sugamchand Tapadiya and 2 Others v. the State of Maharashtra through the Secretary Urban Development Department, Mumbai and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Central Bureau of Investigation Thr. Police Inspector, Ant. Corruption Bureau, Nagpur Vs Ravishekhar Bhaskar Londekar

Sau. Vidya Vinod Ingale Vs Vinod Chintaman Ingale

Abhishek Pillai S/O Gopinathan Pillai and Others Vs State of Mah. through P.S.O. P.S. Lakadganj, Nagpur and Another

Yunus Kha Dilawar Kha Pathan Vs Divisional Commissioner, Amravati Division and Another

Devidas Narayan Ingle Vs State Bank of India Thr. Chairman, Bombay and Another

Sunil S/O Markandiji Palhale Vs State of Maha. Thr. Secretary, Department of School Education, Mumbai and Others