Case Note & Summary
The appellant, a partnership firm and joint owner of land in Survey No.7, Mouja Durgavada, Morshi, had its land reserved for shopping centre and garden in the final development plan published on 11.07.2005 and effective from 01.09.2005. After the lapse of 10 years, the appellant served a first notice under Section 127 of the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 on 13.07.2015, which was replied as premature. A second notice was sent on 31.08.2015. The municipality's General Body Meeting on 30.11.2015 resolved to acquire the land, and a proposal was submitted to the Collector on 14.01.2016, but was returned as not in order. A fresh proposal was submitted on 16.12.2016, but no further steps were taken. The appellant filed a writ petition seeking declaration that the reservation had lapsed. The High Court dismissed the petition, holding that the second notice was premature and thus no need to examine acquisition steps. The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, holding that the second notice was received on 02.09.2015, after the 10-year period, and was valid. The court further held that the municipality did not take adequate steps for acquisition within 24 months, as the proposal was not in order and no acquisition occurred. Consequently, the reservation lapsed and the land stood released from reservation.
Headnote
A) Town Planning - Lapsing of Reservation - Section 127 of Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 - Notice Period - The court held that the second notice dated 31.08.2015 was received on 02.09.2015, after the expiry of 10 years from the date the final development plan came into force (01.09.2005), and thus was not premature. The High Court erred in relying solely on the acknowledgment receipt without considering the General Body Meeting resolution which recorded the correct date of receipt. (Paras 14-15) B) Town Planning - Lapsing of Reservation - Section 127 of Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 - Acquisition Steps - The court found that the municipal authorities did not take adequate steps for acquisition within 24 months from the service of notice. The proposal submitted was not in order and no further action was taken, leading to the lapsing of reservation. (Paras 16-17) C) Constitutional Law - Right to Property - Article 300A - The court emphasized that prolonged delay in acquisition affects the owner's right to enjoy property, and the provision for lapsing is not to be used as a tool to defeat the purpose of the Act but to protect owners from indefinite reservation. (Para 15)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the notice under Section 127 of the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 was premature and whether the municipal authorities took adequate steps for acquisition within 24 months to prevent lapsing of reservation.
Final Decision
The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, set aside the High Court order, and declared that the reservation of the appellant's land had lapsed under Section 127 of the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966. The land stood released from reservation and became available to the owner for development as permissible.
Law Points
- Section 127 of Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act
- 1966
- lapsing of reservation
- notice period
- acquisition steps
- factual finding in writ jurisdiction
