2001 Supreme(Bom) 776

IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
B.P. Singh, C.J. Smt. Ranjana Desai, J.
M.A. Panshikar .... Petitioner.
Versus
State of Maharashtra through its Urban
Development Department another.... Respondents.
Writ Petition No. 3498 of 2000 with Civil Application Nos. 8320, 9246, 9248, 9249 9250 of 2000 with Civil Application Nos. 50, 51 210 of 2001, decided on 23-8-2001.
Advocates appeared :
S.G. Aney with S.M. Oak, for petitioner.
G.E. Vahanvati, A.G. with N.P. Deshpande, A.G.P., for respondent No. 1.
R.S. Apte, for respondent No. 2.
V.M. Thorat for P.N. Patil, for intervener in C.A. 8320 of 2000.
Shekhar Naphade for A.A. Kumbhakoni, for intervener in C.A. No. 9246 of 2000.
Y.S. Jahagirdhar for A.A. Kumbhakoni, for interveners in C.A. No. 9248 of 2000 and 9249 of 2000.
P.K. Dhakephalkar, in C.A. 9250 of 2000, for intervener .
R.S. Apte, for applicant in C.A. 50 of 2001.
S.V. Pitre, for intervener in C.A. 51 of 2001, for vacating interim relief.
A.V. Anturkar, for intervener in C.A. 210 of 2001, for vacating interim relief.

Headnote:MRTU & PULP Act, 1971 - Sections 22-A, 31 and 37 - Constitution of India, Article 226 - Gaothan/congested area - Quashing of three notifications issued by Urban Development Department sought - State Government sanctioned draft development plan of Thane Municipal Corporation with certain modification by first notification - Plan accepted - Petitioner challenged this notification - Sanctioned congested area beyond limits of Gaothan - Held - Municipal Corporation can include adjacent area as Gaothan as congested area - Can submit plan for development of area - Proposal rightly framed - Sanction by Govt. justified - Inclusion of adjacent area in notification not faulted. - The respondent-corporation took up the task of framing a new development plan, which it was obliged to do. The plan was submitted to the Government, and sanctioned by the Government in part after fully complying with the provisions of the MRTP Act. Reliance placed on the directions issued by the State Government on 23rd April, 1993 under Section 154 of the MRTP Act could have no effect on the draft development plan which was submitted later for Government s sanction. Moreover, those directions were expressly made tentative till the Draft Development Control Regulations submitted to the Government by the Thane Municipal Corporation in 1998 were finalised, and which were ultimately finalised on the 19th June, 1993. Court, therefore, find no merit in the challenge to the first noti-fication. The planning authority was competent to frame the development plan for the area within its jurisdiction after the Thane Municipal Corporation came into existence. Under Section 21(2) of the MRTP Act, every planning authority constituted after the commencement of the MRTP Act is required to prepare a draft development plan and publish a notice of such preparation in the official Gazette not later than three years from the date of its constitution. The Thane Municipal Corporation was established on 1st October, 1982, and, therefore, it was required to prepare a Draft Development Plan. Under sub-section (5) of Section 21, if any local authority, which is the planning authority, is converted into any other local authority, the development plan prepared for the area by that planning authority so converted shall with such alterations and modifications, as the State Government may approve, be the development plan for the areas of the new planning authority. Thus, the old development plan sanctioned for the Thane Municipal Council continued to be in force with such alterations and modifications as the State Government approved. This was subject to the proposed draft development plan by the Thane Municipal Corporation. Exhibit J dated 23rd April, 1993, containing directions issued by the Government under Section 154 of the MRTP Act and Exhibit L dated 19th June, 1993, sanctioning minor modifications in the Development Control Regulations by the State Government under Section 37(2) of the MRTP Act, must be understood, in this background. All this was subject to the final development plan, which was to be prepared in accordance with the provisions of the MRTP Act by the respondent-corporation, and sanctioned by the State Government. It is not disputed before us that the provisions of the MRTP Act, insofar as they relate to the preparation of a draft development plan, and for its sanction by the State Government, have been strictly observed. There is nothing in the MRTP Act which prevented the planning authority from extending the Gaothan area for the purpose of planning, or inhibited the planning authority from framing a plan in relation to what is described as "congested area" instead of "Gaothan". The planning authority, after taking into account all the relevant facts and circumstances, submitted the revised draft development plan to the Government, which has been sanctioned by the Government in the exercise of power vested in it under Section 31(1) of the MRTP Act. We, therefore, find no ground to quash the first notification.

       Wakf Act, 1954-"Planning Authority". - The expression "Planning authority" means a local authority, including a special Planning Authority or appointed under Section 70 of Act.

       Wakf Act, 1954-"Local Authority". - The term "Local Authority" means the Municipal Corporation constituted under Municipal Corporation Act and Nagar Municipal Corporation under the Municipal Corporations Act, 1949, constituted under Maharashtra Muni-cipalities Act, 1965 .