NCLAT: Cannot Withhold Income Tax Refund Received by Bank During CIRP In CD's Account  ||  All. HC: With S. 111 of BNS Covering 'Organised Crime' It Appears Gangsters Act has become Redundant  ||  P&H HC: Cannot Allow Changes in Admission Form after Submission  ||  Bom. HC: Findings in Criminal Proceedings Cannot Be Relied Upon While Adjudicating Civil Proceedings  ||  P&H HC Directs Jail Authorities to Decide Parole Applications within Four Months  ||  Allahabad HC: Merely Supporting Pakistan Will Not Prima Facie Attract Section 152 of BNS  ||  HP HC Upholds Wife’s Claim of Adverse Possession after Husband’s Death  ||  Patna HC: Maintenance may be Allowed in Disputed Marriages if Relationship Was Socially Accepted  ||  Karnataka HC: State to Respond in 3 Weeks regarding Mandatory Teaching of Kannada  ||  Delhi HC: Husband Unhappy in Marriage is No Proof of Abetment of Suicide    

Chetan and Ors. Vs. The State of Maharashtra and Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2024:BHC-AS:9242-DB) - (High Court of Bombay) (27 Feb 2024)

Owner cannot be deprived of his rights to the property after the statutory period has expired

MANU/MH/1186/2024

Property

By present Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, 1950, the Petitioners seek a writ of mandamus directing the Respondent No.1 to issue a notification in the Official Gazette as per Section 127(2) of the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 ("MRTP Act") that, the reservation for a 'Stadium' on the Petitioners' land has lapsed and the said land is available to the Petitioners to develop.

If the land reserved for any purpose specified in any plan under the MRTP Act is not acquired by agreement as provided under Section 127 then the reservation, allotment or designation shall be deemed to have lapsed and the land shall be deemed to be released from such reservation and shall become available to the owner for the purpose of development.

In the present case, the Respondents have not denied the stated facts. It is apparent that almost 20 years have lapsed since the reservation was sanctioned. As held in Girnar Traders vs. State of Maharashtra and Ors., an owner cannot be deprived of his rights to the property after the statutory period has expired. In the present case too, it is admitted that no steps were taken to acquire the land as contemplated under Section 126 of the MRTP Act.

No steps as contemplated in law have been taken till date. The property cannot be held under reservation without acquisition in perpetuity. The owner cannot be denied the right to enjoy the fruits of development or compensation. The Respondents have clearly failed in performing their duty. Reservation bearing site has lapsed and the said land is available to Petitioner for the purpose of development or otherwise, as is permissible. The State is directed to issue a notification under Section 127(2) of the MRTP Act and publish the same in official Gazette with respect to lapsing of reservation.

Tags : RESERVATION   LAND   EXPIRY  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2025 - All Rights Reserved