Allowed

Aarati Kakasaheb Dhondare and Another v. the State of Maharashtra through Department of Urban Development and Others

Bombay HC11 Aug 2023WP/1571/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petitions challenging lapsing of reserved land due to inaction by CIDCO authorities. Court allowed petitions directing authorities to forward proposals for issuance of acquisition notifications within stipulated timelines.

What did the court decide?

Petitions allowed; CIDCO authorities directed to forward proposals within 45 days for issuance of notifications under section 127(2) of MRTP Act within 60 days thereafter.

Aarati Kakasaheb Dhondare and Another… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Bombay HC (2023)

¶1

916&7917wp1567-23

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶3

916 WRIT PETITION NO.1567 OF 2023

¶4

VIMALBAI BHAUSAHEB DHONDARE AND OTHERS

¶5

VERSUS

¶6

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH DEPARTMENT OF URBAN

¶7

DEVELOPMENT AND OTHERS

¶8

AND

¶9

917 WRIT PETITION NO.1571 OF 2023

¶10

AARATI KAKASAHEB DHONDARE AND ANOTHER

¶11

VERSUS

¶12

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH DEPARTMENT OF URBAN
DEVELOPMENT AND OTHERS

¶13

Mr. Shubham S. Khoche, Advocate for Petitioners
Mr. V. M. Kagne, AGP for Respondents 1 to 4/State
Mr. Sachin S. Deshmukh, Advocate for Respondent No.5

¶14

CORAM: RAVINDRA V. GHUGE &
 Y. G. KHOBRAGADE, JJ.
DATE : 11th August, 2023

¶15

ORDER:

¶16

1. In both these matters, the issue is with regard to the lapsing

¶17

of reservation.

¶18

2.In the first petition, the land of the petitioner admeasuring 1
Hectare was earmarked for a playground and 0 H 34 R land was
earmarked for a school, out of Gat No. 53 in village Golwadi Tq. & Dist.
Aurangabad by the final sanction to the development plan accorded by
the State on 14.08.2001.

¶19

Page 1 of 3

¶20

916&7917wp1567-23

¶21

3.In the second matter, the land of the petitioner admeasuring
0 H 14 R was earmarked for a Mangal Karyalaya and 0H 06 R was
earmarked for a social facility in Gat No. 70. So also, land admeasuring
0.H 12 R for a social facility and 0 H 10 R for a Dispensary, was
earmarked in Gat No. 78 of village Golwadi by the final sanction to
the development plan.

¶22

4.Since the steps were not taken towards acquisition, purchase
notice under section 127 of the Maharashtra Regional and Town
Planning Act, 1966 was issued in both the matters, on 11.02.2019. No
steps were taken for acquisition as contemplated under section 126 (1)
(c) of the Act. Development Rights Certificate was offered in lieu of
compensation which, the petitioners have declined to accept.

¶23

5. CIDCO authorities have filed an affidavit in reply. The learned Advocate representing CIDCO has vehemently opposed both these petitions and prays that they should be dismissed with costs.

¶24

6.Insofar as any step as recognized by the law laid down by the
Hon’ble Supreme Court in Girnar Traders and Another Vs. State of
Maharashtra and others; 2007 AIR (SC) 318, the CIDCO authorities
cannot indicate from the record that any such steps have been taken
within a period of 24 months, after the issuance of the purchase notice.

¶25

7. In view of the above, both these petitions are allowed.

¶26

Page 2 of 3

¶27

916&7917wp1567-23

¶28

8.We direct the CIDCO authorities to forward appropriate
proposals to the competent authority within 45 days from today. The
competent authority shall accordingly issue the notifications under
section 127(2) of the MRTP Act, within 60 days thereafter.

¶29

( Y. G. KHOBRAGADE, J. )

¶30

 ( RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J. )

¶31

JPChavan

¶32

Page 3 of 3

Aarati Kakasaheb Dhondare and Another v. the State of Maharashtra through Department of Urban Development and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Aarati Kakasaheb Dhondare and Another v. the State of Maharashtra through Department of Urban Development 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

Shivdas Bhavsing Chavan and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra through the Secretary and Others

Sumanbai Uttam Gadekar Vs the State of Maharashtra Thr Its Secretary and Others

Jalgaon District Central Co. Operative Bank Ltd. Jalgaon through Its Manager Vs the State of Maharashtra through Its Principal Secretary and Others

Grampanchayat Pethwadaj through Its Sarpanch Anita Datta Gaikwad Vs the State of Maharashtra through Its Secretary and Others

Vimalbai Bhausaheb Dhondare and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra through Department of Urban Development and Others

Parbhanna Poshetti Died through Lrs Mahadu Parbhanna Died through Lrs Vs the Collector Nanded and Others