Allowed

Motilal Mohanlal Munot v. the State of Maharashtra through Its Secretary and Others

Bombay HC2 Apr 2024WP/4456/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought deletion of land reservation for a sports complex after 10 years of inaction by authorities. Court held reservation lapsed under Supreme Court precedent, directing authorities to issue notifications.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner's writ petition allowed; Municipal Corporation directed to communicate lapse within 30 days and issue notification under Section 127(2) within 90 days.

Motilal Mohanlal Munot Vs the State of Maharashtra… — Landlord and Tenant | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

2024:BHC-AUG:7422-DB

¶2

1 905wp4456o23

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO.4456 OF 2023

¶5

Motilal Mohanlal Munot, Age: 62 years, Occ: Business, R/o: Pratapnagar, opposite B.N.Jain School, Jalgaon, Tq. & Dist. Jalgaon.

¶6

...PETITIONER

¶7

-VERSUS-

¶8

The State of Maharashtra Through its Secretary, Urban Development Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai.

¶9

The Director of Town Planning, Maharashtra State, Pune.

¶10

The Collector, Jalgaon.

¶11

The Municipal Commissioner, Jalgaon Municipal Corporation, Jalgaon.

¶12

The Assistant Director of Town Planning, BJ Market, Jalgaon.

¶13

...RESPONDENTS

¶14

…

¶15

Shri A.B. Kale, Advocate for the Petitioner. Shri V.M. Kagne, AGP for Respondent Nos.1 to 3/State. Shri V.D. Gunale, Advocate for Respondent Nos.4 and 5.

¶16

CORAM : RAVINDRA V. GHUGE &

¶17

R.M. JOSHI, JJ.

¶18

DATE :- 02^nd April, 2024

¶19

¶20

905wp4456o23

¶21

ORAL JUDGMENT (Per Ravindra V. Ghuge, J.):-

¶22

Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard

¶23

finally by the consent of the parties.

¶24

The Petitioner has put forth prayer clauses C and D

¶25

as under:-

¶26

“C) To direct the Respondents to De-reserve the land of the petitioner admeasuring 0.40R from Gut 1204 situated at Asoda, Tal & DistJalgaon which is reserved for the purpose of sports complex/stadium and for that purpose issue necessary orders;

¶27

D) To direct the Respondents to delete the reservation of land of the petitioner admeasuring 0.40R from Gut 1204 situated at Asoda, Tal & Dist- Jalgaon which is reserved for the purpose of sports complex/stadium from the Development Plan as per Section 50 of the Maharashtra Regional Town Planning Act and for that purpose issue necessary orders;”

¶28

The Acquiring Authority has not chosen to file an

¶29

affidavit in reply.

¶30

Relevant sequence of events are as under:-

¶31

(a) The Jalgaon Municipal Corporation prepared a Draft

¶32

Development Plan for Jalgaon (additional area) No.226 and the

¶33

3 905wp4456o23

¶34

Government of Maharashtra sanctioned the said plan on 11.08.2004. As per the plan, the Petitioner’s land was reserved for constructing a stadium/ sports complex.

¶35

(b) After lapse of 10 years, the Petitioner issued a purchase notice on 12.01.2018 under Section 127 of the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 (for short, “the MRTP Act”).

¶36

¶37

(d) Prior thereto, a proposal was forwarded on 08.04.2015 to the District Collector. Since then, nothing has moved at the end of the District Collector or in furtherance of the acquisition proceedings.

¶38

(e) It is not the case that before the Petitioner moved the purchase notice on 12.01.2018, the development plan was revised.

¶39

In view of the above, taking into account the law laid down by the Honourable Supreme Court in Girnar Traders vs. State of Maharashtra and others, (2011) 3 SCC 1 , this Writ Petition is allowed . The Municipal Corporation shall issue

¶40

4 905wp4456o23

¶41

a communication to Respondent No.1 within 30 days, intimating the said Authority that the reservation has lapsed. The first Respondent Authority would, thereafter, issue a notification under Section 127(2) of the MRTP Act, within a period of 90 days thereafter.

¶42

Rule is made absolutely in the above terms.

¶43

kps ( R.M. JOSHI, J. ) ( RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J. )

Motilal Mohanlal Munot v. the State of Maharashtra through Its Secretary and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Motilal Mohanlal Munot v. the State of Maharashtra through Its Secretary 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

Kalpana Deepak Ghorpade and Another Vs Idbi Bank Limited through Its Agm Recovery Vijaykumar Tukaram Nichit

Madhukar Nagnathrao Ozalwar. Vs the State of Maharashtra

Aavas Financiers Limited through Authorised Officer Vs the Upper Districted Magistrate and Another

Sunayana Soloman Adagale Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Parveen Kaisar Khan Vs the State of Maharashtra through Its Principal Secretary and Others

Javed Khan Salimmoddin Khan Vs the State of Maharashtra through Tis Secretary and Others