Bombay High Court Allows Lapse of Reservation Under Section 127 of MRTP Act for Land Reserved for Garden Since 1976 — Award Under Section 23 of RFCTLARR Act 2013 Quashed as Acquisition Not Completed Within Statutory Period

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: BOMBAY In Favour of Accused
  • 89
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The petitioners, owners of land in Kankavali, challenged the reservation of their land for a garden under the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 (MRTP Act) since 1976. They sought a declaration that the reservation had lapsed under Section 127 of the MRTP Act as the acquisition was not completed within 10 years. The respondents had passed an award under Section 23 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (RFCTLARR Act) on 18.04.2016. The court held that the reservation lapsed under Section 127 of the MRTP Act as the acquisition was not completed within the statutory period. Further, under Section 24 of the RFCTLARR Act, the acquisition proceedings lapsed as compensation was not paid within 5 years. The award under Section 23 was quashed. The court directed that the land be released from reservation and the petitioners be entitled to use it as per the development plan.

Headnote

A) Town Planning - Lapse of Reservation - Section 127 of Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 - Land reserved for garden since 1976 - Acquisition not completed within 10 years - Held that reservation lapses and land becomes free from reservation (Paras 1-10)

B) Land Acquisition - Lapse of Acquisition Proceedings - Section 24 of Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 - Compensation not paid within 5 years - Held that acquisition proceedings lapse (Paras 11-15)

C) Land Acquisition - Award under Section 23 of RFCTLARR Act 2013 - Award passed after lapse of reservation - Held that award is invalid and liable to be quashed (Paras 16-20)

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the reservation on the petitioners' land under the MRTP Act has lapsed under Section 127 due to non-completion of acquisition within the statutory period, and whether the award under Section 23 of the RFCTLARR Act 2013 is valid.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The court allowed the petition, declared the land free from reservation under Section 127 of MRTP Act, quashed the award dated 18.04.2016 under Section 23 of RFCTLARR Act, and directed the respondents to release the land from reservation.

Law Points

  • Section 127 of MRTP Act provides for lapse of reservation if acquisition not completed within 10 years from date of reservation
  • Section 24 of RFCTLARR Act 2013 deems acquisition proceedings to have lapsed if compensation not paid within 5 years
  • Section 23 of RFCTLARR Act 2013 for award of compensation
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2022 LawText (BOM) (03) 43

WRIT PETITION NO. 13906 OF 2016

2022-03-23

S. J. KATHAWALLA, MILIND N. JADHAV

2022:BHC-AS:6712-DB

Mr. Pradeep Dalvi for Petitioners, Mr. Drupad S. Patil a/w Mr. Nikhil Pawar for Respondent No.1, Ms. M.P. Thakur, AGP for Respondent Nos. 2 to 4

Shri. Jeevan Mallapa Tonemare and Shri. Sachin Kashinath Tonemare

The Chief Officer, Kankavali Nagar Panchayat; State of Maharashtra; The Collector, Sindhudurg District; Sub-Divisional Officer, Kankavali Sub-Division

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Writ petition seeking declaration that land is free from reservation under MRTP Act and quashing of award under Section 23 of RFCTLARR Act

Remedy Sought

Declaration that suit property is free from reservation under Section 127 of MRTP Act, direction to lapse reservation, and quashing of award dated 18.04.2016

Filing Reason

Reservation on land for garden since 1976 not acquired within statutory period; award passed despite lapse

Issues

Whether the reservation on the petitioners' land under the MRTP Act has lapsed under Section 127 due to non-completion of acquisition within the statutory period? Whether the award under Section 23 of the RFCTLARR Act 2013 is valid?

Submissions/Arguments

Petitioners argued that the reservation for garden was made in 1976 and acquisition not completed within 10 years, hence lapsed under Section 127 of MRTP Act. Respondents argued that the award under Section 23 of RFCTLARR Act was passed and compensation was determined.

Ratio Decidendi

Under Section 127 of MRTP Act, if acquisition of reserved land is not completed within 10 years from the date of reservation, the reservation lapses and the land becomes free from reservation. Under Section 24 of RFCTLARR Act, if compensation is not paid within 5 years, acquisition proceedings lapse. The award under Section 23 passed after lapse is invalid.

Judgment Excerpts

By the present petition, the Petitioners have prayed for the following reliefs: ... declare the suit property being free from reservation under the provisions of Section 127 of Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act. The Petitioners are the owners of land bearing Revisional Survey No.220A/Hissa No.8A and Revisional Survey No.220A/Hissa No.9 bearing CTS Nos.1016 and 1023, totally ad-measuring 69 Ares situated in Tahasil - Kankavali, District - Sindhudurg.

Procedural History

The petitioners filed Writ Petition No. 13906 of 2016 before the Bombay High Court seeking declaration of lapse of reservation and quashing of award. The court heard the matter and delivered judgment on 23 March 2022.

Acts & Sections

  • Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966: 127
  • Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013: 23, 24
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Acquits Police Head Constable in Corruption Case Due to Unreliable Complainant and Lack of Corroboration. Demand and Acceptance of Bribe Not Proved Beyond Reasonable Doubt Under Sections 7, 13(1)(d) r/w 13(2) of Prevention of Corrup...
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Upholds Appellant in Marriage Nullity Case Under Special Marriage Act, 1954 for Fraudulent Consent. Consent to Marriage Obtained Through Fraudulent Misrepresentation of Music Audition, Leading to Decree of Nullity Under Section 25(iii) ...