SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2022 Supreme(Bom) 2054

S. V. GANGAPURWALA, M. G. SEWLIKAR
Ananta Landmarks Private Limited – Appellant
Versus
State of Maharashtra – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
A.A.Kumbhakoni, Advocate, M.P.Thakur , Advocate

Judgement Key Points

Key Points: - The court held that Conversion Rules, 2019 apply to Occupancy Class II lands acquired and allotted under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, and quashed the impugned communication, directing treatment as Occupancy Class II and conversion premium based on the value at the time of application (!) (!) (!) (!) . - The State Government has the power to frame policies under Article 162 of the Constitution of India regarding land use and transfer, provided such policies do not contravene statutes or rules (!) . - The case discusses classification of land as Occupancy Class II and the restrictions on transfer under Sec. 29, 29A of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, and the applicability of Conversion Rules, 2019 to lands granted under Part VII of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and those allotted under the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) . - The government’s policy GR 11/1/2018 permitting transfer/change of user of land acquired for industrial purposes is recognized as permissible, subject to development plans/regulations (!) (!) . - The judgment references CEAT Limited (Supra) to support that lands allotted under Part VII of the Act have Class II occupancy status (!) . - The order directs the Respondent authority to treat the land as Occupancy Class II and to charge the conversion premium based on the valuation on the date of application (!) .

How to apply the Conversion Rules, 2019 to lands acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894?

What is the authority of the State Government to frame policies under Article 162 of the Constitution in the context of land conversion?

What are the restrictions on transfer and the correct classification of occupancy land (Occupancy Class II vs Class I) for conversion purposes?


JUDGMENT

S.V.GANGAPURWALA, J. - Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. By consent of parties, Writ Petition is heard finally.

2. The Petitioner in the instant petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India assails the impugned order / communication dtd. 27/9/2021 issued by the District Collector of Thane i.e. Respondent no.2 thereby rejecting the application filed by the Petitioner for conversion of occupancy from Class-II to Occupancy Class-I of the writ lands.

3. Sans the necessary details, the facts relevant for adjudication of the present petition can be culled out as under:

4. The State of Maharashtra (Respondent no.1) acquired an area of 1,89,680 sq. mtrs. of the lands under the provisions of Part VII of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as the Act, 1894). Upon the request of the predecessor-in-title of the Petitioner, the agreement to that effect was executed, as required under the Act, 1894 in respect of an area of 1,89,680 sq. mtrs. Upon further request of the predecessor-in-title of the Petitioner, the State of Maharashtra also granted an area of 10,900 sq. mtrs. under the provisions of Maharashtra Land Revenue Code. Sanad dtd. 14/12/1990 unde

        Click Here to Read the rest of this document
        1
        2
        3
        4
        5
        6
        7
        8
        9
        10
        11
        SupremeToday Portrait Ad
        supreme today icon
        logo-black

        An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

        Please visit our Training & Support
        Center or Contact Us for assistance

        qr

        Scan Me!

        India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

        For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

        whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
        whatsapp-icon Back to top