Case Note & Summary
Five writ petitions were filed before the Bombay High Court challenging the constitutional validity of Rule 13.3.1.5 of the Development Control Rules for Pune. The lead petition, Writ Petition No. 5838 of 2010, was filed by Pune Ex-servicemen Co-operative Housing Society Ltd., aggrieved by a public notice dated 11.02.2010 published by the Pune Municipal Corporation (PMC) stating that open spaces in the society's layout were being misused and that PMC was taking possession under the said Rule with nominal compensation of ₹1. The society's layout was sanctioned in 1994 and included five open spaces, one of which the society had developed into a jogging park after attempts of encroachment. Other petitions followed similar patterns: WP No. 1991 of 2005 by Walvekar family concerned a layout sanctioned in 1971, before the DC Rules came into force, and PMC published a declaration in 2004 intending to take over open spaces for alleged misuse; WP No. 2119 of 2005 by Gadve and others challenged a similar declaration for a layout at Parvati, Pune; WP No. 4433 of 2006 by Vijay Sanghavi and WP No. 8720 of 2010 by Tulshibagwale also raised analogous grievances. The petitioners contended that the Rule violated Article 300A of the Constitution, as it permitted taking of private property without authority of law and with illusory compensation. They argued that the Rule could not be traced to Sections 202 and 203 of the Bombay Provincial Municipal Corporations Act, 1949, which dealt only with vesting of public streets, not private open spaces. The PMC and the State opposed the petitions, defending the validity of the Rule. The High Court granted rule and interim status quo orders in several petitions. The matters were heard together and judgment was reserved on 25.03.2026 and pronounced on 06.05.2026. The full judgment text was not provided, leaving the final decision unknown.
Headnote
A) Constitutional Law - Right to Property - Article 300A - Development Control Rules, Rule 13.3.1.5 - The petitioners argued that the Rule allows the Pune Municipal Corporation to take over open spaces in private layouts without proper acquisition and on payment of nominal compensation of ₹1, thereby depriving owners of their property without authority of law (Paras 1-2).
Issue of Consideration
Whether Rule 13.3.1.5 of the Development Control Rules for Pune is constitutionally valid and violates Article 300A of the Constitution; whether the Rule can be traced to Sections 202 and 203 of the Bombay Provincial Municipal Corporations Act, 1949; whether the Rule grants unbridled power to PMC without proper acquisition and adequate compensation.
Law Points
- Article 300A
- Right to Property
- Acquisition
- Compensation
- Development Control Rules
- Pune Municipal Corporation
- Bombay Provincial Municipal Corporations Act
- 1949
- Sections 202
- 203
- Unbridled Power
- Constitutional Validity
- Nominal Compensation
