NARESH H. PATIL, J.

1. The petitioner sought for direction for declaration that the land described in Exh.B to the petition stands released from the reservation for a primary school under the Development Plan 1987 for Pune city by virtue of section 127 of the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 ("MRTP Act" for short). The petitioner further prayed for direction to the respondents to complete the acquisition proceedings and to declare award by taking possession of the subject land under section 16 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.

2. The petitioner contended that on 5th January 1987 a final development plan was published. The petitioner has development rights of plot No.188 of Sangamwadi in Pune. The said plot was shown reserved for primary school in the said final development plan. On 10th February 1988, respondent No.2-Corporation moved an application requiring the Government of Maharashtra to acquire the land for the purposes of the primary school as per the reservation made in the final development plan published on 5th January 1987. The petitioner claims to have made several representations reminding the authorities to take necessary steps. The petitioner issued notice on 21st August 2000 purportedly under section 127 of the MRTP Act requiring the respondents to take appropriate action under section 127 of the said Act. The notice was served on the respondents as no steps were taken consequent thereto. The petitioner filed writ petition seeking aforementioned declaration of lapsing of reservation.

3. During the course of hearing before the Division Bench of this Court (Coram: V.G. Palshikar and Ranjana Desai, JJ.) it was submitted on behalf of the petitioner that even assuming without admitting that making an application under section 126(1)(c) of the MRTP Act is a step in proceeding as contemplated by section 127 of the MRTP Act, if the land acquisition proceedings are not completed within a reasonable time, the provisions of section 127 would operate. For want of taking appropriate steps within reasonable time after making an application under section 126(1)(c) of the MRTP Act the land shall be declared to be deserved.

4. It was submitted on behalf of the Corporation that making of application under section 126(1)(c) is a step in the proceeding. The authority contemplated under section 127 is a planning authority or an appropriate authority and the State Government is not such authority. It was, therefore, submitted that where the application under section 126(1)(c) was made and no action was taken on the said application, the reservation of land will be deemed to have lapsed.

5. On behalf of the petitioner and the respondents number of judgments were cited which, according to the learned Division Bench, expressed divergent views. In para-13 of the order of reference the Division Bench has observed as under:

"13. In our opinion therefore there is apparent conflict of views taken by this court. One view is that application under section 126 (i)(c) of the Act is a step for acquisition as contemplated under section 127 of the Act and the other view is making of such an application is not a step for acquisition as contemplated by the Act."

6. On this reference following issues are framed for consideration of the Full Bench, which read as under:

"1) Whether making of an application under section 126(i)(c) of the Act is a step in acquisition as contemplated by section 127?

2) Whether the proceedings for acquisition of land as contemplated by section 127 of the Act are liable to be completed in reasonable time after the notice under that section is issued or can be stalled indefinitely after the application is made under section 126(i)(c) of the Act?

3) Whether the definition of "appropriate authority" occurring in section 2 of the Act includes the State Government as the appropriate authority and therefore action by the planning authority or the appropriate authority must include the acquiring authority."

7. The le