JUDGMENT :

(Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya, J.) :

1. Heard learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the records available before us on these two Public Interest Litigation Petitions (hereinafter referred to as the PIL Petitions).

2. Since, common questions of law and facts are involved in both these PIL Petitions, they are being disposed of by this common judgment which follows.

3. Under challenge in these PIL Petitions is the Notification dated 21st April 2017 issued by the Government of Maharashtra in the Urban Development Department under Section 31 of the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 (hereinafter referred to as the MRTP Act), whereby sanction by the State Government has been accorded to the draft revised Development Plan of the city of Ulhasnagar with the Schedule of modifications as per the Schedule-I appended to the Notification with certain notes. In PIL Petition No.37 of 2018, the Corrigendum issued by the Urban Development Department, Government of Maharashtra dated 23rd June 2017 has also been challenged. The said Corrigendum dated 23rd June 2017 has been issued on observation of certain errors, which, according to the State, have been corrected.

4. The thrust of arguments in support of these PIL Petitions is that while preparing the Development Plan, various statutory prescriptions available in the MRTP Act have been flouted. It has been stated in this regard by the Petitioners that the provisions of Section 25 of the MRTP Act, which provides for survey and preparation of existing land use map have not been adhered to and the base map, prepared for the said purpose is faulty and far away from the actual land use on the spot. It has further been argued that existing land use map should be based on physical survey where all existing users are to be duly marked, however, the existing land use map prepared for the preparation of Master Plan in this case does not identify several land marks of the town, existing public amenities, some public utilities and actual use of land. The Petitioners have given certain examples of such lapses, in the PIL Petitions.

5. It has also been submitted by the learned Counsel for the Petitioners that various objections were raised to the survey and existing land use map, however, these objections have been overlooked by the authorities and hence, the provisions of Section 25 of the MRTP Act have been flouted.

6. Further submission of the learned Counsel for the Petitioners is that detailed provisions have been made in the circulars issued by the State of Maharashtra, dated 19th June 1979, 5th June 1985 and 15th June 1992, however, the norms as prescribed by the State Government in the circulars have not been followed. Drawing our attention to yet another circular dated 11th April 2012, which contains further norms for preparation of draft Development Plan and removal of errors, it has been submitted that even the provisions made in the said circular have not been followed. Pointing out the flaw in the process of preparation of base map, it has been stated that identity of certain properties situate in the city, could not be ascertained. The Petitioners have stated that in absence of appropriate base map the Government built properties like barracks, Governments shops which were transferred to the refugees by the Central Government, lands bearing plots for residential and commercial and industrial purposes, encroachment comprising of extension of Government built properties and constructions and lands under hill slopes and low lying areas, ought to have been kept outside the purview of planning for future needs.

7. It has also been submitted by the Petitioners that objections submitted to the draft Development Plan under Section 28 of the MRTP Act have also not been considered though serious objections were raised and the proposed planning of the city of Ulhasnagar is full of errors. It is stated further that in all 17033 objections were raised to the draft Development