The main legal point established in the judgment is that the reservation would lapse on the expiry of the prescribed period, and any subsequent revision of the Development Plan would not revive or extend such reservation that has already lapsed, as per Section 127 of the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966.

JUDGEMENT :

A. S. CHANDURKAR, J.

1. RULE. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard the learned counsel for the parties.

2. The question that arises for consideration in this writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is whether a reservation pursuant to a Draft Development Plan as published having deemed to have lapsed under Section 127 of the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 (for short, ‘the Act of 1966’) could be revived while publishing the Final Development Plan despite the deeming fiction as contemplated by Section 127 of the Act of 1966.

3. The facts relevant for considering the answer to the aforesaid question are that the petitioners claim to be the owners of Field Survey No.5 admeasuring 6 Hectare 77 R, Field Survey No.15 admeasuring 6 Hectare 05 R and Field Survey No.16 admeasuring 4 Hectare. In the Development Plan of the city of Akola that came into force on 01.04.1977, Field Survey No.5 was shown to be reserved for ‘Playground’ vide Reservation No.93. Since no steps were taken to acquire the said land in the light of the reservation as proposed, the petitioners on 06.05.1991 issued a notice under Section 127 of the Act of 1966 and called upon the Municipal Council, Akola (as it was then) through its Planning Authority to acquire Survey No.5. This notice was received by the Planning Authority on 07.05.1991 but no further steps in that regard were taken. On the contrary, on 07.12.1991, the Standing Committee of the Municipal Council passed a resolution stating therein that since no steps were taken to acquire the said land, Reservation No.93 was being cancelled and conversion of that land for residential use was recommended. Pursuant thereto on 29.11.1995, the Collector granted permission for conversion of the aforesaid three lands for non-agricultural use. The petitioners thereafter gave another notice on 02.08.1995 with regard to Survey No.16 that had been shown as reserved for housing of displaced persons vide Reservation No.99A. On the same day, another purchase notice under Section 127 of the Act of 1966 was also issued for Survey Nos.5 and 16. These notices were received by the Planning Authority on 02.08.1995. On 26.10.2004, the Urban Development Department of the State Government revised the development plan and issued a notification by which the reservation for Site No.141 which was reserved for playground was proposed to be deleted vide Excluded Part No.19 and the land was proposed to be included in the residential zone. The reservation for Site No.142 being reserved for a Cultural Centre was also proposed to be deleted vide Excluded Part No.20 for being included in the residential zone.

4. On 12.03.2015 another notification was published by the Urban Development Department of the State Government under Section 31(1) of the Act of 1966. It was stated that in view of the Final Development Plan the reservation at Site Nos.141 and 142 was retained for ‘Playground’ and ‘Cultural Centre’ respectively. According to the petitioners, in the meanwhile the development of those lands under the Maharashtra Gunthewari Developments (Regulation, Upgradation and Control) Act, 2001 (for short, ‘the Act of 2001’) was approved. Thereafter on 10.10.2018, the Commissioner of Akola Municipal Corporation after its conversion as such informed the Urban Development Department that though the photocopies of the notice under Section 127 of the Act of 1966 were available the Inward Register with that entry was not available in the Office of the Municipal Corporation. It was informed that as per the Final Development Plan dated 12.03.2015 the lands had been subjected to Reservation Nos.141 and 142. It is in this backdrop that the petitioners sought a declaration that since the reservation for the aforesaid lands as shown in the Draft Development Plan had lapsed pursuant to the notice issued under Section 127 of the Act of 1966 it was not permissible for the respondents to revive such reservation that