ORAL JUDGMENT :

(PER : SACHIN S. DESHMUKH, J.)

1. Heard. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Assistant Government Pleader Mrs. M.H. Deshmukh waives service of notice for the respondent No.1 and Advocate Mr. G.A.Kunte waives service of notice for the respondent No.2. By consent of the parties, the petition is heard finally.

2. The petitioner - Society and its members are the owners of land bearing Survey Nos.276, 277, 277/2, 277/3, 279/1, 279/2, 279/3, 278, 280/1, 280/2, City Survey No.1298 admeasuring area about 5.04. H.R. of Mouza Zingabai Takli, Tahsil and District Nagpur (for short hereinafter referred to as “the said land”).

3. The respondent No.2 – Corporation issued Development Plan for Nagpur city and in that process, the land belonging to the petitioner – Society has been impacted on account of 24 meters Development Plan road (D.P. road). The Corporation had proposed the said road of 24 meters under the Integrated Rural Development Program (IRDP) Scheme (Awasthi Nagar Chowk to Borgaon Chowk) for an area admeasuring about approximately 5200 sq. meters, which came to be acquired.

4. Accordingly, the contentions raised on behalf of the petitioner – Society by Mr. S.P. Dharmadhikari, learned Senior Counsel are that the Corporation through its Executive Engineer, building section informed the petitioner - Society that 24 meters of the aforestated area of the land owned and possessed by the petitioner- Society would be impacted in the widening of Development Plan road under the IRDP Scheme. As such in that regard the communication dated 02/08/2001 was issued on behalf of the Corporation committing that in lieu of the compensation the grant of Transferable Development Right (TDR)

would be conferred upon the petitioner- Society herein for surrender of the said land for construction of road under the IRDP Scheme. Admittedly, no compensation was ever offered and only it was assured by virtue of the communication dated 02/08/2001 that the TDR rights would be conferred upon the petitioner- Society. Having assured the conferring of the TDR, which is duly communicated to the petitioner Society herein, it was incumbent upon the respondent – Corporation to act upon the same. Followed by issuance of aforestated communication development rights certificates were issued in favour of the petitioner – Society and its members (page 61 to 70 of the petition) by the respondent – Corporation in the year 2017, 2018 and 2020. Admittedly, the communication dated 02/08/2001 was issued coupled with the issuance of TDR certificates in favour of the members of the petitioner – Society, which is registered under the provisions of the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act. Being the lawful owners and possessors of the land in question, it was incumbent upon the respondent – Corporation to act in letter and spirit of the said assurance and issuance of certificates in favour of the petitioner- Society and its members way back in the year 2001 vis-a-vis while issuing the TDR certificates in the year 2017, 2018 and 2020. While accepting and acting in accordance with the assurance of conferring the TDR in lieu of compensation, which is impacted in development plan for 24 meters D.P. road under the IRDP

Scheme, the Corporation ought to have acceded to the request of the petitioner- Society to confer TDR as is assured on two successive occasions. Having assured and eventually issued the TDR certificates it was not open for the respondent – Corporation to retract from its assurance in any case, which was in lieu of compensation for using the land belonging to the petitioner – Society and its members. As stated hereinabove it was not open for the respondent – Corporation to retract from its assurance, however, making a serious departure from the said assurance, the communication dated 05/12/2024 has been issued by the Corporation, rejecting the request of the petitioner - Society to confer the TDR which is already assured on two successive occasions on uns