Case Note & Summary
The High Court of Judicature at Bombay heard a writ petition filed by ten individuals claiming ownership of plot bearing survey number 110/B in Malegaon, seeking to compel the Malegaon Municipal Corporation (MMC) and other authorities to act against unauthorized constructions on the land. The petitioners' predecessor had purchased the plot under a registered conveyance deed dated 20 August 1986. The development plan for Malegaon City originally showed the plot in a residential zone, but the second revised development plan, which came into effect on 15 September 2006, reserved it for a police station and staff quarters. No acquisition proceedings were initiated for over a decade thereafter. Consequently, the petitioners' application for building permission was rejected in 2005. They issued a purchase notice under Section 127 of the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966, on 12 May 2017, contending that the reservation had lapsed. Meanwhile, unauthorized constructions began to come up on the plot, allegedly in connivance with officials. The petitioners made complaints to MMC on 8 June 2021 and 3 September 2021, but no action was taken. Hence, the writ petition. During the pendency, interim applications were filed by third parties claiming to have purchased portions of the plot, seeking impleadment as respondents. The court clarified that it would not delve into ownership or inter se disputes and would only examine the issue of unauthorized constructions. Responding to the petition, the Assistant Director of Town Planning and other state authorities filed affidavits disputing their role, asserting that MMC is the planning authority responsible for enforcing the development plan. They also pointed out that the purchase notice was defective for want of date and supporting documents, and that the appropriate authority for acquisition was the police department. MMC was directed by an order dated 12 March 2025 to file a reply affidavit, but the record does not indicate compliance. The court, through an observation made on 4 November 2025, strongly deprecated the apathy and complete dereliction of duty by MMC in failing to act on complaints against unauthorized constructions, noting that such inaction is rampant despite several Supreme Court and High Court decisions. The final operative portion of the judgment was not provided in the excerpt.
Headnote
A) Municipal Law - Duty to Remove Unauthorized Constructions - Municipal Corporation Has Statutory Duty to Prevent and Remove Unauthorized Constructions - Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966, Section 31 - Despite repeated complaints, the Malegaon Municipal Corporation failed to take action against unauthorized constructions on petitioners' land, demonstrating apathy and dereliction of duty. Held that such inaction is deprecated and the court must intervene. (Paras 1-2, 12-13). B) Town Planning - Reservation and Lapse - Purchase Notice Under Section 127 Does Not Automatically Lead to Lapse if Notice Defective - Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966, Section 127 - Petitioners issued a purchase notice for a reserved plot, but the respondents contended the notice was without date and lacked necessary documents. The court declined to adjudicate on the validity of the reservation lapse or ownership due to pending inter se disputes and focused on removal of illegal constructions. (Paras 2, 10-11, 15). C) Writ Jurisdiction - Mandamus - Writ of Mandamus Can Issue to Compel Performance of Statutory Duty by Municipal Authorities - Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 - In cases of dereliction of statutory duty by municipal authorities, a writ of mandamus can be issued to compel performance, especially where unauthorized constructions threaten intended public purpose. (Paras 1, 14).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Malegaon Municipal Corporation failed in its statutory duty to remove unauthorized constructions on petitioners' plot, and whether a writ of mandamus should be issued directing demolition
Final Decision
Not mentioned - the provided text does not contain the final operative order
Law Points
- Legal points not extracted
- municipal corporation has duty to remove unauthorized constructions
- courts can issue writ of mandamus to compel performance
- inaction amounts to dereliction of duty
- purchase notice under Section 127 MRTP Act not adjudicated due to inter se disputes
