Reservation in development plan lapses automatically under Section 127 MRTP Act upon notice if land not acquired within 10 years; no court declaration required; authorities must notify lapse promptly.

JUDGMENT (Per : A.S. Gadkari, J.) :-

1) Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and with the consent of learned Advocates for the respective parties taken up for final hearing.

2) By this Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the Petitioner, owner of Survey No.317, Hissa No.3, 4 & 12E, situated at Village Virar, New Viva College Road, Taluka Vasai, District Palghar, (‘said plot of land’) is seeking a writ of Mandamus for declaring that, the reservation on the said plot of land has lapsed and the said land be released from reservation as contemplated under Section 127 of the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 (‘MRTP Act’).

3) Heard Mr. Najmi, learned Advocate for the Petitioner, Mr. Patel, learned Additional G.P. for Respondent No.1, State and Mr. Patil, learned Advocate for Respondent Nos.2 and 3. Perused the record and the Affidavit of Mr. Y. S. Reddy, Deputy Director of Respondent No.3, dated 21^st March, 2025.

4) The Petitioner is owner of the said plot of land. The Development Plan for the Respondent No.2, Corporation was sanctioned on 9^th February, 2007 by the Government of Maharashtra and the said plot of land belonging to the Petitioner has been shown to be reserved for Market Garden, Community Center and 20 mtr. D. P. Road. The Respondent No.1 did not acquire the land of the Petitioner within a period of 10 years as contemplated under Section 126 of the MRTP Act. The said lapsing occurred on 9^th February, 2017. Petitioner therefore issued a Notice under Section 127 of MRTP Act, dated 28^th March, 2018 to the Commissioner of Respondent No.2. By the said Notice, the Petitioner called upon the concerned Authority to either acquire his land or release it from the said reservation.

4.1) Record indicates that, there was no response to the said Notice by Respondent Nos.2 and 3. In this precise background, present Petition was filed on 1^st November, 2023.

5) Mr. Y. S. Reddy, Deputy Director of Town Planning Department of Respondent Nos.2 and 3 has filed an Affidavit dated 21^st March, 2025. In paragraph No.4 thereof, it is admitted that, the Respondent- Corporation by its letter dated 3^rd March, 2025 informed the Petitioner that, the reservation upon his land has lapsed by operation of law. Moreover, the Respondent No.2-Corporation doesn’t have budgetary provision for the purchase of the land under reservation and consequently it is unable to provide monetary compensation for the said land.

5.1) It is also stated that, the Petitioner can handover the land to the Respondent-Corporation and would be granted compensation in the form of TDR as per Unified Development Control Rules (‘UDCPR’). It be noted here that the offer for granting TDR in lieu of monetary compensation was communicated to the Petitioner by an alleged communication dated 3^rd March, 2025, which was also made after a lapse of about one and half years from the date of filing of present Petition.

5.2) It appears to us that the said communication dated 3^rd March 2025 addressed to the Petitioner was purely an afterthought, with a view to create a record and nothing else.

6) In view of the afore-stated facts, it is abundantly clear that the said reservation on the Petitioner’s land as specifically described in the Petition and prayer clauses has lapsed as contemplated under Section 127(1) of the MRTP Act.

7) We find that the concerned authorities clearly ignored the directions issued in the various Judgments of this Court. They appear to be bent upon in harassing the citizens for the reasons best known to them.

8) In Shivgonda Anna Patil v Sangli Miraj and Kupwad City Municipal Corporation reported in 2023: