S. V. Gangapurwala, J.

Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. With the consent of learned counsel for respective parties matters are taken up for final hearing.

2. The petitioner is an industrial association of small scale industries. In Writ Petition No. 5069 of 2010, the petitioner seeks direction against the Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation (hereinafter referred to 'MIDC') to cancel and set aside the allotment of open spaces/amenity places/plots for industrial purpose. In Writ Petition No. 7259 of 2012 the petitioner challenges the Revised Development Control Regulations, 2009 (hereinafter referred to 'Regulations-2009') on the ground that State Government and MIDC have no authority to sanction said Regulations.

3. Mr. Talhar, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the members of the petitioner association are industrialist and are allotted the plots within the Jalgaon industrial area. The learned counsel submits that so as to set up industries in orderly manner the Maharashtra Industrial Development Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to 'MID Act') was enacted and by virtue of the said act the respondent Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation was formed. The Development Plan is to be prepared and as per the Development Plan the plots are to be given to the industries on lease hold basis. The Development Plan earmarks open plots. The same are to be kept vacant for amenity purposes. As the plots are amenity plots the MIDC does not have authority to allot the said plots for industrial purpose. The open plots are lungs of the industrial area. The MIDC decided to allot the open plots for educational and other purposes. The petitioner challenged the said action by filing writ petition in the High Court. In the writ petition undertaking was given by the MIDC that the amenity plots will not be allotted to other parties. In view of the undertaking given by respondents no further orders were passed by the High Court. The High Court in the said writ petition observed that the Corporation has categorically undertaken that it will maintain open spaces for reserved area as per the Rules and Regulations. According to the learned counsel, ignoring the above facts, the MIDC again decided to allot the open plots by maintaining the seniority of the applications.

4. The learned counsel submits that without following any due process, the MIDC has decided to allot the open spaces. The said action on the part of the MIDC is bad in law. It is not permissible for the MIDC to allot the open spaces for industrial purpose as per the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 (hereinafter referred to 'MRTP Act') and as per the MID Act. The learned counsel submits that MIDC has to first convert the open spaces for industrial purpose, then alone MIDC can allot the plot for industrial purpose. The MRTP Act does not provide any such provision to convert amenity plot for industrial purpose. As such, MIDC does not have authority in law to allot open plots for industrial purpose. The learned counsel submits that without following procedure under Section 115 of the MRTP Act the MIDC cannot develop the land. The procedure prescribed under Section 115 of the MRTP Act has not been followed. In view of that MIDC cannot convert the open space into industrial plot. The learned counsel submits that reliance placed upon the Regulations-2009 is misplaced. The Corporation is relying upon the Circular to suggest that the percentage of amenity area/open space to be maintained is 10% of the 1 Hector land. Keeping 10% open land is a minimum requirement. If the approved lay out shows the percentage of open space more than 10% that does not mean that it cannot be maintained. Under the Regulations-2009, no procedure is provided to convert open space into industrial plot. The provisions under Section 115 of the MRTP Act have to be