Case Note & Summary
The petitioners, owners of land in Pune, issued a purchase notice under Section 127(1) of the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 (MRTP Act) on 16th September 2013, after the publication of a draft revised development plan on 28th March 2013. The respondent Pune Municipal Corporation failed to take steps for acquisition within the prescribed one-year period. The petitioners sought a declaration that the land stood de-reserved by deemed fiction. The Municipal Corporation argued that the purchase notice was invalid because it was issued after the draft revised plan, which showed an intention to continue the reservation. The court, relying on the judgments in Santu Sukhdeo Jaibhave v. Nashik Municipal Corporation and Balkrishna Jagannath Lad v. Indian Postal Department, held that the purchase notice was valid and that the subsequent sanction of the revised development plan did not affect the deemed de-reservation. The court allowed the petition, declaring that the land stood de-reserved.
Headnote
A) Town Planning - Purchase Notice - Validity - Section 127(1) Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 - The court considered whether a purchase notice issued after publication of a draft revised development plan is valid. Held that the purchase notice is valid and not affected by the subsequent sanction of the revised development plan, as the notice was issued under the earlier development plan and the statutory period for acquisition had expired. (Paras 2-4)
B) Town Planning - Deemed De-reservation - Effect of Revised Development Plan - Section 127 MRTP Act - The incidental question was whether deemed de-reservation occurs if no acquisition steps are taken within one year of a valid purchase notice, despite a subsequent revised development plan. Held that the deeming fiction under Section 127 operates and the land stands de-reserved, as the revised plan does not revive the reservation. (Paras 2-4)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Purchase Notice issued by the petitioners under Section 127(1) of the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966, dated 16th September 2013 is valid, and if so, whether it leads to deemed de-reservation of the land despite the sanction of a revised development plan subsequent to the notice.
Final Decision
The court allowed the petition, holding that the purchase notice was valid and that the land stood de-reserved by deemed fiction under Section 127 of the MRTP Act.
Law Points
- Validity of purchase notice under Section 127(1) MRTP Act
- Deemed de-reservation
- Effect of subsequent revised development plan on purchase notice
Case Details
2023 LawText (BOM) (08) 40
Writ Petition No.337 of 2022
Sunil B. Shukre, Rajesh S. Patil
Mr. Prathamesh Bhargude with Mr. Sumit Sonare and Mr. Sharad Dhore for Petitioners, Ms. M.P. Thakur AGP for Respondent Nos.1 and 2, Mr. R.S. Khadapkar for Respondent Nos.3 to 5
Babanrao Dattu @ Dattoba Dangat, Sakharam Dattu @ Dattoba Dangat, Jaysingh Dattu @ Dattoba Dangat, Balu Dattu @ Dattoba Dangat, Laxmibai Murlidhar Chinchwade
State of Maharashtra, Secretary Urban Development Department, Pune Municipal Corporation, Deputy Commissioner Pune Municipal Corporation, Deputy Engineer Construction Development Department Pune Municipal Corporation
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ Petition challenging the validity of a purchase notice and seeking declaration of deemed de-reservation under the MRTP Act.
Remedy Sought
Petitioners sought a declaration that the land stood de-reserved due to the failure of the Municipal Corporation to acquire the land within one year of the purchase notice.
Filing Reason
The petitioners issued a purchase notice under Section 127(1) of the MRTP Act on 16th September 2013, but the Municipal Corporation did not take steps for acquisition within the prescribed period.
Issues
Whether the Purchase Notice dated 16th September 2013 issued under Section 127(1) of the MRTP Act is valid.
Whether the deemed de-reservation under Section 127 is affected by the sanction of a revised development plan subsequent to the purchase notice.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioners argued that the purchase notice was valid and that no acquisition steps were taken within one year, leading to deemed de-reservation. They relied on Santu Sukhdeo Jaibhave and Balkrishna Jagannath Lad.
Respondent-Municipal Corporation argued that the purchase notice was invalid because it was issued after publication of a draft revised development plan, which showed intention to continue the reservation.
Ratio Decidendi
A purchase notice issued under Section 127(1) of the MRTP Act after publication of a draft revised development plan is valid. If no steps for acquisition are taken within one year, the land stands de-reserved by deeming fiction, and a subsequent revised development plan does not affect this de-reservation.
Judgment Excerpts
The only issue involved in this petition is whether the Purchase Notice issued by the petitioners, under Section 127(1) of the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966, of 16th September 2013 is valid or not.
He relies upon the view taken in this regard in the recent judgment delivered in the case of Santu Sukhdeo Jaibhave and Ors. Vs. Nashik Municipal Corporation and Ors, along with connected matters.
Procedural History
The petitioners filed Writ Petition No.337 of 2022 before the Bombay High Court challenging the validity of the purchase notice and seeking deemed de-reservation. The court heard the matter and delivered judgment on 2nd August 2023.
Acts & Sections
- Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966: 127, 127(1)
