SHIVRAM KONDAJI SATHE Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule.

(2.) Present petition is filed by the petitioners under Articles 14, 19, 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India seeking declaration that the reservation of petitioners' land is lapsed for not acquiring inspite of purchase notice issued by them under section 127 of the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966. It is the case of the petitioners that they are owners of land situated at Shirasgaon, Tq-Shrirampur, Dist-Ahmednagar bearing Gut No. 92 admeasuring 5 Hectors. The said land is within Shrirampur Municipal Council, Shrirampur - respondent No. 5. It is the case of the petitioners that respondent No. 5 prepared development plan for the development of the area of Municipal Council limits in which the petitioners' land is situated. The development plan of Shrirampur was finally sanctioned by the Director of Town Planning - respondent No. 3 by its Order dated 23/5/ 1990. It is the case of the petitioners that as per the sanctioned development plan out of "Gut No. 92" a piece of land admeasuring 6360 sq.mt. was reserved for the public purpose i.e. for play ground. Leaving apart the said area, the petitioners developed the remaining area of the land by obtaining sanction to the lay out of the land and permission for non agricultural use. It is the case of the petitioners that actually there was no need to reserve petitioners land for play ground purpose. The action of respondent No. 1 is totally political motivated. It is the case of the petitioners that there are other lands in Shrirampur city which are reserved for the purpose of play ground. Though several lands were reserved for the purpose of play grounds for last more than 20 years, respondent No. 5 failed and neglected to take action for acquisitions of those lands. It is th*e case of the petitioners that the scheme and development plan are sanctioned long back about 20 years but till today not a single plot/land is acquired by respondent No. 5 Planning Authority. Though the Development Plan was sanctioned on 23/5/1990 till filing of present petition, respondent No. 5 Planning Authority has not taken any step or action for acquisition of petitioners' land. Therefore the petitioners issued notice on 20/6/2002 under section 127 of the MRTP Act, 1966 to respondent Nos. 3 to 5. The said notice received by respondent No. 5 Planning Authority on the same date i.e. 20/6/2002.

(3.) Therefore, Mr. A.B. Kale, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of petitioners submitted that in view of section 127 of the said Act, this Court be pleased to declare that the reservation of the petitioners' land is lapsed and same be treated as dereserved directing respondents to make appropriate entry in revenue record to that effect.