Advocates:
['SHENDURNIKAR PUSHKAR S', 'R/ SERVED', '', 'M S DESHMUKH', 'GP']

wp8089.09

1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD.

WRIT PETITION NO.8089 OF 2009.

Madhukar Tryambak Patil,

age 56 years, occu. agril.,

r/o Krushnapuri, Pachora,

Taluka Pachora,

Dist. Jalgaon.

... PETITIONER.

V/S

1.

The State of Maharashtra,

through the Secretary,

Urban Development Department,

Mantralaya,

Mumbai - 40 032.

2.

The Pachora Municipal Council,

through its Chief Officer,

Pahora Municipal Council,

Pachora, Dist. Jalgaon.

3.

The Collector, Jalgaon,

Dist. Jalgaon.

4.

The Assistant Director of

Town Planning,

Jalgaon.

... RESPONDENTS.

...

Mr.P.S. Shendurnikar, Adv. for petitioner.

Mr.K.B. Chaudhari, AGP for R.Nos.1,3 & 4.

R.No.2 served.

...

CORAM: R.M. BORDE & S.S. SHINDE, JJ.

DATE: 16.10.2012.

ORAL JUDGMENT: (PER BORDE, J)

1.

Rule, returnable forthwith. By consent of parties,

wp8089.09

2

taken up for final disposal at admission stage.

2.

Petitioner is owner of Survey No.6/2 (Gat No.30),

admeasuring 1H-97R, situated at Krushnapuri, Taluka

Pachora, District Jalgaon. An area admeasuring 84R is

reserved in Development Plan prepared for Pachora

Municipal Council on 1.2.1987. Since no steps for

acquisition were taken by Municipal Council for a period of

10 years from date of publication of final plan, petitioner

served a notice on Planning Authority as contemplated by

Section 127 of the Maharashtra Regional and Town

Planning Act, 1966 on 26th March, 2007, which has not

been disputed by Planning authority. Since date of service

of notice on planning authority, no steps were taken for

acquisition of land as contemplated by Section 127 of said

Act as such reservation, allotment or designation shall

stand lapsed. Petitioner tendered an application to

planning authority for deleting reservation on land on

account of lapsing of reservation and for granting

development permission. However, petitioner was not

granted development permission by Planning authority. As

such, petitioner approached this Court seeking declaration

that reservation, allotment or designation of said plot of

wp8089.09

3

land in final development plan for Pachora Municipal

Council shall stand lapsed and land shall be available for

petitioner / owner for purpose of development as otherwise

permissible in case of adjacent land under development

plan.

3.

An affidavit-in-reply has been filed on behalf of

respondents and it is contended that steps for acquisition of

reserved property have been initiated. According to

respondents, Municipal Council has sent proposal along

with resolution of Council for acquisition of plot of land

under reservation to Collector and transmitting such

resolution expressing intention of Planning authority

constitutes taking of steps in furtherance of acquisition.

Issue as to whether transmitting request for acquisition of

property to Collector would constitute steps taken in

furtherance of acquisition as contemplated under Section

127 of the said Act is no more res integra in view of

decision of Supreme Court in case of Girnar Traders (II)

vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors., (2007) 7 SCC 555.

It is urged that since issue dealt in Girnar Traders is

referred for consideration to larger Bench, it would not be

appropriate to pass declaration as requested by petitioner.

wp8089.09

4

It is stated by respondents in affidavit-in-reply that issue

determined in Girnar Traders is referred to larger Bench in

the matter of Poona Timber Merchants and Saw Mill Owners

Association Vs State of Maharashtra reported in 2008(4)

SCALE 737. Similar argument advanced was taken into

consideration by Division Bench of this Court in matter of

Harendra Bhikubhai Adhyaru & ors vs. State of

Maharashtra and ors. in Writ Petition No.3954/2006 and

other companion matters decided on 31st March, 2012.