2022 Supreme(Online)(BOM) 2536
HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE R.D. DHANUKAHON'BLE JUSTICE KAMAL KHATA
TRILOK SINGH PAHLAJSINGH RAJPAL AND 1 ANR. – Appellant
Versus
MUNICIPAL CORPORATION FOR GREATER MUMBAI AND 4 ORS. – Respondent
WP/2450/2016
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.2450 OF 2016
1. Trilok Singh Pahlajsingh Rajpal, ]
adult, Indian Inhabitant, residing at ] 101, Jesal Apartments, Tagore ] Road, Santacruz (West), Mumbai. ]
2. Hardevi Pahlajsingh Rajpal, adult, ]
Indian Inhabitant, residing at 101, ] Jesal Apartments, Tagore Road, ] Santacruz (West), Mumbai. ]
... Petitioners Versus
1. Municipal Corporation for Greater ]
Mumbai, a statutory body ] constituted under the Mumbai ] Municipal Corporation Act, 1888, ] having its office at Mahapalika ] Marg, Mumbai – 400 001. ]
2. The Municipal Commissioner, ]
Municipal Corporation of Greater ] Mumbai, having his office at ] Municipal Corporation Building, ] Mahapalika Marg, Mumbai – 400 ] 001. ]
3. The Chief Engineer (D.P.), ]
Municipal Corporation of Greater ] Mumbai, having his office at ] Municipal Corporation Building, ] Mahapalika Marg, Mumbai – 400 ] 001. ]
4. The Special Land Acquisition ]
Officer, Mumbai and Mumbai ] Suburban District, Old Custom ] House, D.B. Building, 1st Floor, ] S.B. Marg, Fort, Mumbai. ]
5. State of Maharashtra, through the ]
Government Pleader, High Court, ]
Bombay. ] … Respondents …
Mr. Bhushan Deshmukh with Mr. Sahil Gandhi, Ms. Dimple Vora i/b M/s. Markand Gandhi & Co. for the petitioners.
Mr. Joquim Reis, senior advocate with Ms. Vandana Mahadik, Ms. Sheetal Metakari i/b Mr. Sunil Sonawane for the respondents-MCGM.
Mr. Laxmikant Satelkar, A.G.P. for respondent Nos.4 and 5-
State.
…
CORAM : R.D. DHANUKA &
KAMAL KHATA, JJ.
RESERVED ON : 25TH JULY, 2022.
PRONOUNCED ON : 16TH SEPTEMBER, 2022.
JUDGMENT: - [Per Kamal Khata, J.]
1. Rule. Learned counsel for the respondents waives service.
Rule is made returnable forthwith.
2. The petitioners in this Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India have prayed for a writ of mandamus declaring that with effect from 22nd February 2008 the land bearing CTS No. F/189, F/190, F/191, F/192 corresponding to Final Plot No.646, T.P.S. No.III, Bandra, Mumbai admeasuring 900 sq. yards equivalent to 752.49 sq. meters along with structures standing thereon (hereinafter referred to as “the said property”) is released from reservation made under the Development Plan sanctioned on 7th May 1992.
3. The petitioners have also prayed for a writ of mandamus for an order and direction to respondent Nos.1 to 3 and 5 to take all necessary steps to amend the necessary records including Development Plan sanctioned on 7th May 1992 and quashing the acquisition proceedings commenced before respondent No.4 pursuant to the Application dated 13th February 2008 in respect of the said land.
4. The petitioners are the owners of the piece and parcel of land bearing final plot no. 646, TPS III Bandra viz. the said land. It is the case of the petitioners that the requisition has lapsed as the respondents have failed to take steps to acquire the said land under Section 127 of the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 (in short, “the MRTP Act”).
5. The factual aspects stated in the Writ Petition are as under:-
(a) By a Deed of conveyance dated 17 July 1978, registered with the sub registrar of assurances under No. 1348 of 1978 made and executed between one Devraj Ranka and others (Vendors) and Pahlajsing Tulsidas Rajpal (Purchasers), the vendors sold all that piece and parcel of land bearing CTS No. F/ 189, F/190, F/191, F/192 corresponding to final plot No. 646, TPS III, Bandra admeasuring about 900 sq. yards equivalent to 752.49 sq. metres along with structures standing thereon. The name of Pahlajsingh Tulsidas Rajpal was duly mutated on the property card, the town planning records in respect of the said property maintained by respondent no.1. The said property is occupied by tenants/occupants.
(b) On 25th December 1998 Shri Pahlajsingh Rajpal expired leaving the petitioners herein as the only heirs and legal representatives. The petitioners are thus the owners of the said property and their names are duly mutated in t