27 August 2024 Property Law >> Personal Law  

In a significant legal development, the Bombay High Court has granted a petition filed under Article 226 of the Indian Constitution, directing the Maharashtra State Government to issue a notification declaring the lapsing of a reservation on the petitioner’s property. This decision underscores the importance of adherence to statutory provisions under the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 (MRTP Act).

Background:

The petitioner, an owner of land parcels situated in Village Mangrul, Taluka Ambernath, District Thane, was aggrieved by the failure of the relevant authorities to follow legal procedures regarding land reservation. Specifically, the land in question was designated as a “Garden” under Reservation No. 51 in the draft development plan of the Kulgaon Badlapur Municipal Council (KBMC), published in 2000 and sanctioned on 25 July 2005.

Despite the land being reserved for almost 15 years, from July 2005 until October 2020, no steps were taken by the authorities for its acquisition as required under Section 126 of the MRTP Act. This inaction prompted the petitioner to issue a Purchase Notice on 22 October 2020, as per Section 127 of the MRTP Act. Following the statutory two-year period, the petitioner filed the petition on 19 April 2023, challenging the continued reservation of the property.

Court’s Ruling:

In its ruling, the Bombay High Court reiterated the principles established in previous judgments, notably in the case of Uday Madhavrao Patwardan & Ors vs Sangli Miraj Kupwada City Municipal Corporation (2015). The court highlighted that, according to the MRTP Act, once a valid purchase notice is issued and the stipulated period expires without any acquisition steps being taken, the reservation is deemed to have lapsed automatically. There is no need for a formal court declaration for the reservation to be considered lapsed.

The court also referenced its earlier judgment in Sampat s/o Keru Chaudhary & Ors v State of Maharashtra & Ors (2024), reinforcing that a failure to act on the purchase notice within the statutory timeframe results in the automatic lapsing of the reservation. The court observed that KBMC had not taken any effective steps for acquisition as required by law. As a result, the petitioner was entitled to the relief sought.

Directions:

The court issued a writ of mandamus, directing the State Government and the relevant authorities to issue a notification declaring the lapsing of Reservation No. 51 for the petitioner’s land. The notification must be published in the official gazette within six months from the date of the order. Additionally, any development permissions applied for by the petitioner must be processed expeditiously, within a year of submission.

Conclusion:

This decision underscores the judiciary's commitment to upholding statutory compliance and ensuring that citizens' rights are protected under the law. The court's ruling not only addresses the specific grievances of the petitioner but also reinforces the procedural obligations of authorities under the MRTP Act. The petition was granted with no cost order, and all concerned parties are required to act on an authenticated copy of the court's order.

  MAHARASHTRA REGIONAL AND TOWN PLANNING ACT, 1966