MOHAN S O GOPALRAO MATE Vs. PRINCIPAL SECRETARY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule made returnable forthwith by the consent of Mr. C.V. Kale, Counsel for petitioner, Mr. S.V. Akolkar, Advocate for Intervenor and Mrs. Dangre, Additional Government Pleader for Respondents. Heard the learned Counsel for the respective parties.

(2.) Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is Ex-MLA and a social worker. The impugned Government Resolutions have adversely affected large number of Housing Schemes and it will also affect large number of individual flat owners in several such Schemes. It is next to impossible to acquire land in the vicinity and to construct and hand over 5 % built up area in today's rate and sell it to Government nominees at Rs. 400/- per square feet of the built-up area, which is the Government predetermined rate for Government quota flats. The instant petition aims at protecting large number of people, which includes buyers of the apartments, from the undue hardship that may ensue due to implementation of the impugned Government Resolutions, which are unjust, discriminatory, invalid and contrary to the provisions of law.

(3.) Counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that the petitioner has filed the present petition in the interest of Public as the Government Resolutions dated 8.11.2007 and 12.4.2007 are against the Public Policy and would affect the citizens who are the original owners of the lands and were legally granted exemption to hold vacant lands in excess of the ceiling limit Under section 20 of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 (hereinafter referred to as the U.L.C. Act., which has been repealed w.e.f. 29.11.2007 by the Government by adopting the Urban Land (Ceiling And Regulation) Repeal Act, 1999 (hereinafter referred to as the Repeal Act.). Though the U.L.C. Act has been repealed intentionally and mala fidely, Government has issued the aforesaid resolutions which are impugned in this petition. As a result, the Government, instead of ruling out manipulation, is giving opportunity to the respondent Nos. 2 and 3 to take arbitrary and mala fide decision so as to harass the original land owners/scheme holders as well as a common man who has purchased the flats in the said Scheme. It is submitted that, after granting exemption to hold vacant land in excess of the ceiling limit under section 20 of the U.L.C. Act, the land owners have to surrender certain portion of the vacant land to the Government free of cost. The Government, prior to adoption of Repeal Act, allowed to utilize such lands by the original land owners under the provisions of section 23 of the said Act, if it was not possible to use such a land for any public purpose and was likely to be encroached. It is further submitted that considering inability of Government to protect the possession of said land, it was permissible to the land owners to buy-back such lands vide Government Resolution No. U.L.C. 10 (2004)/C No. 93/U.L.C.A-2 dated 14.7.2004. However, for no cogent reason, Government has issued the impugned Resolution dated 8.11.2007 which is prima facie arbitrary, unjust and not in the public interest and therefore, the same is liable to be quashed and set aside. This decision of the Government is arbitrary and that would give rise to the respondent Nos. 2 and 3 to allot such lands (surrendered lands) to the men of their choice. This has happened on a large scale, as has been specifically observed and pointed out by the "JUSTICE BATTA COMMISSION." and therefore, revoking the earlier decision i.e. buy-back of surrendered land, again there would be accumulation of huge lands with the respondent Nos. 2 and 3 and there would be repetition of the malafide acts by the respondent Nos. 2 and 3. As a result of which, the main aim and object of the Special Act would be defeated.