2011 Supreme(Bom) 1284
2012 (1) ALL MR 610
In the High Court of Bombay at Nagpur
S.A. BOBDE & M.N. GILANI
The Court on its own motion & Another
Versus
The State of Maharashtra & Others
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 34 OF 2010 & WRIT PETITION NO. 125 OF 2011
Decided on : 21-10-2011
For the Petitioner:K.H. Deshpande, Senior Counsel D.V. Chauhan, (Amicus Curiae), M.M. Sudame, S.J. Khandalkar, Advocates.
For the Respondents:R1, R2, R8 & R11, R4 & R5, Mrs. B.H. Dangre, Additional Government Pleader, R3 & R4, M.M. Sudame, S.J. Khandalkar, R1 & R5, S.K. Mishra, R9, R.S. Sundaram, R10, S.M. Ukey, Advocates.
Headnote:MAHARASHTRA REGIONAL AND TOWN PLANNING ACT, 1966 - Section 45(5) - Deemed permission. Deemed permission to an application under Section 44 of Act, can apply only to cases where permission is otherwise capable of being sanctioned in law.
The provision that the permission shall be deemed to have been granted within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of the application if the Planning Authority does not communicate its decision whether to grant or refuse permission can apply only to cases where the permission is otherwise capable of being sanctioned in law.
If an application cannot be sanctioned, it certainly cannot be said that it is capable of a deemed sanction. In the present case, it is clear that no permission for development could have been granted by the Planning Authority since the site in question was not buildable at all being reserved as an open space for extension of Maharajbagh.
S.A.BOBDE, J.
1] Rule returnable forthwith. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties finally by consent.
2] P.I.L. No. 34/10 initiated by the Court on its own motion and Writ Petition No. 125/11 filed by Dr. Punjabrao Deshmukh Krishi Vidyapeeth relate to the same construction on land bearing Khasra No. 83/4 of Mouza Lendra in the city of Nagpur and have been taken up together by the consent of parties for final disposal.
3] The PIL inter alia calls upon Dr. Punjabrao Deshmukh Krishi Vidyapeeth, Akola (hereinafter referred to as “the Agricultural University”) to showcause why the construction should not be declared illegal and why it should not be demolished. Writ Petition No. 125/11 is preferred by the Agricultural University praying that the orders passed by the Planning Authority rejecting the application made by the Agricultural University for permission to construct and directing the removal of the unauthorized construction and the order of the Government of Maharashtra rejecting the Agricultural University’s appeal against the rejection of the building plan and seeking regularization of the construction be quashed and set aside.
4] The main issue in both these matters is whether the Agricultural University had any authority in law to make a construction on the agricultural fields in its possession reserved for the extension of the adjoining Maharajbagh Zoo in the development plan on its own and whether the same is permissible.
5] Somewhere near the middle of the city of Nagpur is located a large area of land occupied by the Maharajbagh Zoo. Adjoining it is the land in question which is a large agricultural field. This area has been in existence as an open space since a very long time. The agricultural fields have been in existence since times immemorial and are described in the Heritage List as ancient. These fields are included in the Heritage List for preservation of sites for historical and archaelogical importance prepared under the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act. These fields have always been attached to the Agricultural College run by the respondent Agricultural University, Nagpur and have been used by the College as a Laboratory for carrying out experiments in agriculture since as long as anyone remembers. The fields present a very beautiful sight and act as the lungs of the city. They are surrounded by busy roads and constructions on the southern and eastern side, by the area of the Agricultural College on the western side and the Maharajbagh Zoo towards the north. In the revenue records, these fields are given Khasra No. 83/4 and are shown as held by the respondent Punjabrao Deshmukh Krishi Vidyapeeth (hereinafter referred to as “the PKV”) which is a University formed under a statute, i.e. Maharashtra Agricultural Universities Act, 1983. Sometime in the year 2007 the Agricultural University apparently started construction knowing fully well that this area is reserved for agricultural purposes.
6] This area known as the PKV fields in the Heritage List was reserved as an open space for extension of the Maharajbagh Zoo. PKV made an application through one Shri Bhushan Kotwal to the Planning Authority, Nagpur under the Maharashtra Regional & Town Planning Act, 1966 (hereinafter referred to as “the MRTP Act”) for development of the site under Sections 44 & 45 of the Act. Strangely, an application was made for development of the site by construction of a farmers’ Communication Centre and not for a research laboratory. The application mentions that the PKV seeks permission to make the construction on Khasra No. 79 and not Khasra No. 84, which is the Khasra number of the present site. Khasra No. 79 mentioned in the application is an adjoining area which is reserved for construction on which the PKV already constructed a ‘Shetkari Bhawan’. The application dated 13.4.2007, therefore, does not mention Khasra No. 84 which has already been reserved for agricultural fields, but Khasra No. 79 on which c