Case Note & Summary
The petitioners, owners of two parcels of land in Borivali, Mumbai, filed writ petitions seeking a declaration that the reservation of their lands for a public garden under the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 (MRTP Act) had lapsed. The lands were reserved in the 1967 Development Plan, which was revised in 1993, retaining the garden reservation. The Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (the planning authority) did not take steps to acquire the lands within ten years from the date of the last sanctioned plan. Consequently, the petitioners served notices under section 127 of the MRTP Act on the Municipal Corporation, demanding acquisition or lapse of the reservation. No declaration under section 126 of the MRTP Act read with section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 or section 19 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 was published within one year from the service of the notices. The Corporation contended that a proposal had been submitted to the Collector for acquisition, which constituted steps for acquisition, and relied on a Supreme Court order in a similar case concerning adjacent lands owned by one Deorukhkar, where the Court directed the reservation to continue with compensation. A Division Bench of the Bombay High Court had earlier allowed the writ petitions, but the Supreme Court set aside that order and remanded the matters for fresh consideration, observing that the High Court should have examined certain documents and decided the cases individually. After remand, the court considered additional affidavits filed by the Corporation. The central issue was whether the reservation lapsed due to the Corporation’s failure to take steps for acquisition within the statutory period. The petitioners argued that the plain language of section 127 mandated automatic lapse if no acquisition steps were completed within one year after notice. The Corporation argued that sending a proposal to the Collector was a step, and that the Supreme Court’s order in the Deorukhkar case warranted continuation of the reservation. The court analyzed the legal position, relying on the Supreme Court’s decision in Shrirampur Municipal Council v. Satyabhamabai Bhimaji Dawkher, which held that mere initiation of a proposal without publication of a declaration under section 126 did not amount to taking steps. It distinguished the Deorukhkar case on facts, noting that in that case, the landowner had conceded that the land was still needed and the Supreme Court had molded the relief accordingly; no such concession existed here. The court also observed that the revised Development Plan of 2018, which continued to show the reservation, could not revive a lapsed reservation. The court held that since no declaration under section 126 had been published within the prescribed time, the reservation lapsed. The writ petitions were allowed, and it was declared that the reservation for public garden stood lapsed, making the land available for any use permissible under the Development Plan.
Headnote
A) Town Planning - Reservation Lapse - Section 127, Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 - When the planning authority fails to take steps for acquisition within one year from the service of a purchaser notice, the reservation shall be deemed to have lapsed. The reservation for public garden lapsed because no declaration under section 126 read with the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 or the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 was published within the statutory period (Paras 5, 25, 32). B) Town Planning - Steps for Acquisition - Sections 126 and 127, Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 - Mere submission of a proposal to the Collector or initiation of the acquisition process without publication of the final declaration under section 126 does not constitute taking steps for acquisition. Following the Supreme Court decision in Shrirampur Municipal Council v. Satyabhamabai Bhimaji Dawkher, the court held that no steps were taken where only a proposal was sent and no declaration was published (Paras 18-24, 30). C) Town Planning - Distinction from Earlier Supreme Court Order - Sections 126 and 127, Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 - In Hiraman Sitaram Deorukhkar v. Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai (Civil Appeal No.11258 of 2017), the Supreme Court directed continuation of reservation based on a concession that the land was still needed and ordered compensation. That case is distinguishable because no such concession was made here and the landowner did not agree to continue the reservation. Consequently, no direction to continue reservation could be given (Paras 26-31, 34). D) Town Planning - Effect of Revised Development Plan - Section 127, Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 - The inclusion of the subject lands in a subsequent development plan as reserved for garden does not revive a reservation that has already lapsed by operation of law. The revised development plan of 2018 showing the reservation could not alter the legal position that the lapse had already occurred (Paras 33). E) Land Acquisition - Declaration under New Act - Section 19, Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 - For a reservation to be valid, a declaration under section 126 must be read with section 19 of the new Act. The failure to publish such a declaration within the prescribed period results in the lapse of the reservation. No such declaration was issued, and thus the reservation lapsed (Paras 5, 35).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the reservation of the subject lands for public garden lapsed on failure of the Planning Authority to take steps for acquisition within the period stipulated under sub-section (1) of section 127 of the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 after service of notices by the landowners.
Final Decision
The writ petitions are allowed. The reservation of the subject lands for public garden in the sanctioned Development Plan stands lapsed. The petitioners are entitled to use the subject lands for any purpose permissible under the Development Plan. The concerned authorities shall act accordingly.
Law Points
- Lapse of reservation
- Section 127 MRTP Act
- steps for acquisition
- publication of declaration
- Section 126 MRTP Act
- purchaser notice
- automatic lapse
- failure to acquire
- deeming provision
