Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, a landowner, filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution seeking a declaration that her land reserved in the Development Plan stood de-reserved and released under Section 127 of the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966. The reserved land, survey no. 118/4/1 at Mauje Nimkhedi shivar, Jalgaon, was originally owned by the Shirsale family and was purchased by the petitioner through sale deeds dated 19.05.2011 and 29.04.2014. It was reserved for Town Hall and Library in the final Development Plan of the excluded part (EP) of Jalgaon (Additional Area) published on 01.10.2014. The respondents did not acquire the land under Section 126 of the Act within ten years of reservation. The petitioner served a purchase notice dated 29.09.2017 under Section 127 on respondent no.3, which was received on 11.10.2017. Respondent no.3 replied by letters dated 16.12.2017 and 12.03.2019 offering compensation in the form of Transferable Development Rights (TDR). The petitioner declined TDR by letter dated 16.03.2019 and claimed monetary compensation under the Land Acquisition Act. The Municipal Corporation passed resolution no.79 on 21.02.2019 to offer TDR due to financial condition. The Commissioner requested the District Collector by letter dated 05.04.2018 to publish notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act. The Land Acquisition Officer by letter dated 29.07.2019 directed joint measurement. Respondents contended that TDR was valid compensation and that acquisition proposal was in progress, hindered by Covid-19. The petitioner relied on Balaji Associates v State of Maharashtra and Hitendra Shankar Patil v State of Maharashtra to argue that after declining TDR, the Planning Authority was bound to acquire only under the Land Acquisition Act. The Court framed five questions, including whether Planning Authority can impose TDR without consent, whether landowner can deny TDR, whether option under clauses (b) or (c) of Section 126 rests with Planning Authority, whether landowner can insist on Land Acquisition Act procedure, and whether granting TDR is an effective step under Section 127. The Court referred to Bhivandi Nizampur City Municipal Corporation v Shri Vilas Kashinath Patil, where it was observed that clauses (a), (b), (c) of Section 126 are alternative and the option rests with the owner; clause (b) TDR applies only in lieu of an amount agreed under clause (a); otherwise clause (c) Land Acquisition Act applies. The Court noted that the correctness of this interpretation needed to be revisited. The provided judgment text ends before the Court's final findings and operative order; therefore the final decision is not available in the extracted text.
Headnote
A) Town Planning - Acquisition of reserved land - Compensation modes under Section 126(1) - Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966, Sections 126, 127 - Landowner served purchase notice after reservation not acquired within ten years; Planning Authority offered TDR which landowner declined. The Division Bench framed questions whether Planning Authority can impose TDR without consent and whether clause (b) TDR is valid absent agreement. It referred to Bhivandi Nizampur City Municipal Corporation v Shri Vilas Kashinath Patil where Single Judge observed clauses (a), (b), (c) are alternatives and option rests with owner; clause (b) TDR only in lieu of amount agreed under clause (a), otherwise clause (c) Land Acquisition Act applies. The Court noted that the correctness of this interpretation needed to be revisited. (Paras 11-17) B) Town Planning - De-reservation under Section 127 - Purchase notice and 24-month period - Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966, Section 127 - The period of twenty-four months to acquire or commence steps begins from receipt of purchase notice by Planning Authority; cause of action arises on failure within that period. Petitioner served notice dated 29.09.2017 received on 11.10.2017 and filed petition on 02.07.2020 after expiry. (Paras 2-3, 8)
Issue of Consideration
Whether Planning Authority has power to acquire lands reserved under Development Plans by granting TDR in lieu of monetary compensation without landowner consent; whether landowner can deny TDR; whether option to acquire under clauses (b) or (c) of Section 126 rests with Planning Authority only; whether landowner can insist acquisition only under Land Acquisition Act; whether granting TDR is effective step under Section 127.
Law Points
- Land reserved under development plan must be acquired under Section 126 of MRTP Act
- if not acquired within ten years owner may serve purchase notice under Section 127
- if Planning Authority fails to acquire or take steps within twenty-four months of purchase notice land deemed de-reserved
- compensation under Section 126(1)(b) by TDR or FSI is only in lieu of amount agreed under clause (a)
- without agreement acquisition must follow Land Acquisition Act under clause (c)
- option among clauses (a) (b) (c) under Section 126 rests with landowner not Planning Authority
- word 'or' makes clauses alternate
- statutes authorizing taking of property construed strictly
- interpretation favoring citizen accepted.
