1 wp 1205.21

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD

WRIT PETITION NO. 1205 OF 2021

Kiransing Yograjsing Parihar,

Age : 65 Years, Occu. : Agriculturist,

R/o Parihar Chowk, House No. 14,

Dharangaon, Tq. Dharangaon,

District Jalgaon.

.. Petitioner

Versus

1.

The State of Maharashtra,

Through Secretary,

Urban Development Department,

Mantralaya, Mumbai – 32.

2.

The Assistant Town Planner,

Jalgaon, Tq. & Dist. Jalgaon.

3.

Dharangaon Municipal Council,

Dharangaon, Tq. Dharangaon,

District Jalgaon,

Through its Chief Officer.

4.

The Sub Post Master,

Post Office, Dharangaon,

Tq. Dharangaon, Dist. Jalgaon.

5.

The Chief Post Master,

Aurangabad Region, Aurangabad.

.. Respondents

Shri A. R. Syed, Advocate for the Petitioner.

Shri S. G. Sangle, A.G.P. for the Respondent No. 1.

Shri Jitendra V. Patil, Advocate for the Respondent No. 3.

Shri Amol Patale, Advocate for Respondent Nos. 4 and 5.

The Respondent No. 2 is served.

2 wp 1205.21

CORAM :

S. V. GANGAPURWALA AND

R. N. LADDHA, JJ.

DATE :

23RD AUGUST, 2021.

ORAL JUDGMENT (Per S. V. Gangapurwala, J.) :-

.

Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. With the consent

of parties taken up for final hearing.

2.

The development plan of the respondent No. 3/Municipal

Council was published on 12.12.2005 (with effect from

27.12.2005). The land of the petitioner from Sy. No. 910 (Gut No.

610) [CTS No. 5328] is reserved under the reservation site Nos.

15, 16 and 18. The site No. 15 is reserved for post office to the

extent of 0.24R. The site No. 16 is reserved for shopping complex

to the extent of 0.38R and site No. 18 is reserved for parking to

the extent of 0.08R.

3.

The petitioner on or about 08.12.2016 issued notice U/Sec.

127 of the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act (for

short “MRTP Act”) to the planning authority and also to the post

office (respondent Nos. 4 and 5).

4.

The notice is served upon the planning authority and the

post office. The learned counsel submits that, no declaration

U/Sec. 126 of the MRTP Act read with Section 19 of the Right to

Fair Compensation in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and

Resettlement Act, 2013 (for short “Act of 2013”) has been issued

till date. The reservation stands lapsed.

3 wp 1205.21

5.

The learned advocate for the planning authority submits

that, to the extent of site No. 16 land reserved for shopping

complex, the resolution is passed by the Municipal Council and

proposal has been sent to the Collector. The respondent No. 3

has also paid the necessary measurement charges, but further

steps are not completed. No fault lies with the municipal council.

6.

The learned advocate further submits that, so far as site

No. 15 reserved for post office is concerned, the Municipal

Council did not receive further communication from the office of

the post office and no further steps are initiated.

7.

The learned advocate for respondent Nos. 4 and 5 submits

that, the matter is pending consideration with the higher officer

of the respondent Nos. 4 and 5 and they are considering

feasibility of acquisition. As such the Municipal Council was

communicated not to take further steps.

8.

We have considered the submissions canvassed by the

learned advocate for the respective parties.

9.

The factum of the land of the petitioner under reservation

is not disputed by the respondents. The respondents also did not

dispute receipt of notice U/Sec. 127 of the MRTP Act. Same

appears to be served upon them on or about 26.09.2016. The

respondents have not taken further steps for acquisition. In that

event the reservation stands lapsed. Reference can be had to the

judgment of the Apex Court in a case of Girnar Traders and another

4 wp 1205.21

Vs. State of Maharashtra and others reported in (2011) 3 SCC 01.

10.

Se