Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Indian Institute of Architects, a society registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860, filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging a communication dated 12.04.1991 from the Nagpur Improvement Trust (respondent No. 1) informing that the land under reference No. W-87 reserved for the Architect Association could not be allotted to them. The petition was filed in June 1991. Subsequently, the State of Maharashtra (respondent No. 2) sanctioned a draft development plan under Section 31(1) of the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966, removing the reservation in favour of the petitioner. This notification was published on 21.09.2001 and the challenge to it was incorporated by way of amendment. Later, after finalization of the development plan under Section 31(6) of the Act, the Nagpur Improvement Trust decided to develop the land on BOT (Build-Operate-Transfer) basis and called for tenders. The offer of respondent No. 4, Indo Pacific Software and Entertainment Limited, was accepted, and respondent No. 4 was added as a party on 06.10.2004. The parties invited the court's attention to a judgment concerning the same site delivered by the court. The court held that the reservation in a development plan does not create any vested right in favour of the petitioner. The State Government has the power to modify the development plan under Section 31(1) and finalize it under Section 31(6). After finalization, the petitioner cannot challenge the removal of reservation. The allotment on BOT basis to respondent No. 4 is valid, and the petitioner has no locus standi to challenge it. The petition was dismissed.
Headnote
A) Town Planning - Reservation - Vested Right - Section 31 Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 - Reservation of land for Architect Association does not create any vested right in favour of the petitioner - The State Government has power to modify the development plan under Section 31(1) and the final plan under Section 31(6) - The petitioner cannot challenge the removal of reservation after the plan is finalized (Paras 1-3). B) Town Planning - BOT Allotment - Validity - Section 31 Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 - After finalization of development plan, the Nagpur Improvement Trust decided to develop the land on BOT basis and accepted the offer of respondent No. 4 - The allotment is valid and the petitioner has no locus to challenge it (Paras 1-3).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the petitioner has a vested right in the reservation of land for its association, and whether the State's action in removing the reservation and allotting the land on BOT basis is valid.
Final Decision
The petition is dismissed. The court upheld the State's power to modify the development plan under Section 31 of the MRTP Act and found no vested right in the petitioner.
Law Points
- Reservation in development plan does not create vested right
- State can modify plan under Section 31 MRTP Act
- BOT allotment valid
- no locus standi for petitioner after reservation removed
