SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2014 Supreme(SC) 854

RANJAN GOGOI, R.K.AGRAWAL
PRAFULLA C. DAVE – Appellant
Versus
MUNICIPAL COMMISSIONER – Respondent


JUDGMENT

RANJAN GOGOI, J.

1. The question arising for determination in the present appeal has been succinctly formulated by the High Court in the following terms:

“Whether, the plan first prepared and notified under Section 21 of the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 (‘MRTP Act’) is the final development plan and the plan prepared under Section 38 is only a revision of the final development plan proposed under Section 21 of the MRTP Act and as such, the notice contemplated under Section 127(2) of the MRTP Act and the period prescribed is from the publication of the development plan first notified under Section 21 and not the revised development plan under Section 38?”

2. To answer the aforesaid question, a brief conspectus of the statutory framework under the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘MRTP Act’) will be necessary.

3. The preamble to the Act suggests that the MRTP Act was enacted, inter alia, “…….to make better provisions for the preparation of development plans with a view to ensuring that town planning schemes are made in a proper manner and their executions is made effective………..” .

4. Section 2 of the MRTP Ac




































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top