GOPAL KASHINATH LAD Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. With the consent of both the sides, the matter is heard finally.

(2.) In this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the Petitioner has put-forth prayer clause-A, B and C as under:

(3.) Adv. Subodh Shah, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner canvassed that, Shenphadu Tukaram Bhai and others were the owners of land Survey No. 76/2 - 1 to 5 + Survey No. 76/1-4 admeasuring 3039 Sq. Mtrs., which is subject matter of the present petition. On 17/10/1986, the Final Development plan for Dhule was sanctioned and the said land was reserved vide Site No. 35 for Children's playground. On 24/07/1999, the Original Owner Shenphadu Bhoi and his family members executed a Notorised Power of Attorney in favour of Rajendra Vasantrao Sonar. As per para 5 of the power of attorney, the original owner had empowered Shri Rajendra Vasantrao Sonar for taking appropriate action to free the land from reservation. Therefore, on the basis of authorisation by the original land owners, Shri Rajendra Vasantrao Sonar issued a purchase notice on 29/12/2000 claiming to be the owner of the petition land and referred to this notarized Power of Attorney. Thereafter, on 15/06/2001, the Respondent No. 4 Municipal Council Dhule submitted a proposal to the collector for acquisition of land pursuant to the purchase notice. Therefore, the development authority acted upon the purchase notice. However, the Respondent No. 4 has not taken step to acquire the land within the period of 24 months, therefore, the reservation lapses and the land is free from acquisition.