Case Note & Summary
This judgment arises from a reference made by a Division Bench of the Bombay High Court at Nagpur, which disagreed with the view taken in Asha Sunil Zawar v. State of Maharashtra & Ors. (W.P. No.5938 of 2020). The Division Bench referred three questions to a Larger Bench concerning the interpretation of Section 126(1) of the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 (MRTP Act). The first question was whether the modes of acquisition under Section 126(1)(a) (by agreement paying an amount) and (b) (grant of TDR/FSI in lieu of compensation) are at the choice of either party or only of the acquiring authority. The second question was whether, after the planning authority has approved the land owner's request for monetary compensation or TDR, the land owner can withdraw that request and refuse to surrender the land. The third question was whether the grant of approval or passing of a resolution for TDR can be treated as a step for acquisition of land, thereby commencing acquisition proceedings. The Larger Bench, comprising Justices Sunil B. Shukre, Anuja Prabhudessai, and Anil L. Pansare, held that the modes of acquisition under Section 126(1) depend on the agreement between the parties, and the consent of the land owner is equally important and a pre-condition. The option is not solely with the acquiring authority. The Court further held that if the planning authority has approved the land owner's request for compensation or TDR, the land owner can withdraw that request before the acquisition is finalized, and such withdrawal would prevent the surrender of the land. Additionally, the Court ruled that the grant of approval or resolution for TDR does not constitute a step for acquisition of land; it is merely a preliminary step and does not commence acquisition proceedings. The judgment clarifies that the land owner's consent is essential for the mode of acquisition, and the land owner retains the right to withdraw consent until the acquisition is complete.
Headnote
A) Town Planning - Acquisition of Land - Section 126(1)(a) and (b) MRTP Act, 1966 - Consent of Land Owner - The modes of acquisition under Section 126(1) viz. by agreement paying an amount or by grant of TDR/FSI depend on agreement between parties where consent of land owner is equally important and a pre-condition. The option is not solely with the acquiring authority. (Paras 1-3) B) Town Planning - Withdrawal of Request - Section 126 MRTP Act, 1966 - Land Owner's Right - If the planning authority has approved the request of the land owner for monetary compensation or TDR, the land owner can withdraw his request and refuse to surrender the land, as the acquisition process is not complete until final steps are taken. (Paras 2-3) C) Town Planning - Commencement of Acquisition - Section 126 MRTP Act, 1966 - Approval of TDR - Grant of approval or passing of resolution by authorities for grant of TDR in lieu of monetary compensation cannot be treated as a step for acquisition of land and thereby commencing proceedings for acquisition. (Paras 2-3)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the modes of acquisition under Section 126(1)(a) and (b) of the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 are at the choice of either party or only of the acquiring authority; whether land owner can withdraw request for TDR after approval; whether grant of approval for TDR can be treated as a step for acquisition.
Final Decision
The Larger Bench answered the referred questions: (i) The modes of acquisition under Section 126(1)(a) and (b) are at the choice of both parties, requiring consent of land owner. (ii) The land owner can withdraw his request for TDR after approval and refuse to surrender the land. (iii) Grant of approval for TDR does not constitute a step for acquisition of land.
Law Points
- Consent of land owner is a pre-condition for mode of acquisition under Section 126(1)(a) and (b) of MRTP Act
- 1966
- land owner can withdraw request for TDR before final acquisition
- approval of TDR by authority does not commence acquisition proceedings.
