Amit Dineshchandra Palan vs The State of Maharashtra and Ors.

At the outset, Mr.M.V.Bute, learned counsel for respondent No.3, submits that though 'respondent No.4' is not mentioned in the memo of petition, the same has been wrongly mentioned in the reply. He therefore, seeks permission to delete 'respondent No.4' from the array of respondents in his reply, so also to correct the chronology of respondents.

Permission is granted. Amendment be carried out forthwith. The learned counsel for respondent No.3 shows his willingness to deposit costs of Rs.1,000/- (Rupees One Thousand only) to the High Court Legal Services Sub-Committee, Nagpur. Let the costs be deposited within two weeks.

Heard. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally with the consent of the learned counsel appearing for the parties.

It is the case of the petitioner that he is the owner and possessor of the land bearing Survey No.35, admeasuring 0H.18R of Village Khelkhasa (Kh), Tq. Jalgaon (Jamod), District – Buldhana. The land is situated within the Development Plan limits of Municipal Council, Jalgaon Jamod, District – Buldhana and it was sanctioned, published in the Official Gazette and came into force on 15/01/2006. The land stated above was shown to have been reserved in the Development Plan vide reservation No.36 for "Garden".

As the land was not acquired, notice through counsel was issued by the petitioner to the respondent No.1 – State of Maharashtra through the Director of Town Planning and respondent No.2 – Municipal Council/Nagar Parishad, Jalgaon Jamod on 30/01/2024. Along with the said notice, the document of ownership, 7/12 extract, measurement sheet and part plan notified under the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 ('Act of 1966') was also attached. Said notice was issued through R.P.A.D. and postal receipt dated 30/01/2024 was relied upon by the petitioner. Since no steps were taken in spite of receipt of notice, petition came to be filed praying for declaration that reservation has lapsed.

In pursuance with the notice, the respondent No.2 – Municipal Council has appeared and filed its affidavit-in-reply dated 24/06/2026. Even respondent Nos.1 and 3 – the Director and Assistant Director of Town Planning have filed their reply on 19/06/2026. The respondent No.2 - Municipal Council in its reply has not disputed the fact that the Development Plan came into force in the year 2006 and purchase notice was received on 30/01/2024. It was stated that due to weak financial position of respondent No.2, no action was taken after the receipt of the notice. It was further stated that respondent No.2 did not forward proposal for acquisition of the said land to the Collector for commencing acquisition, as financial position of the respondent Municipal Council was weak. In reply filed by respondent Nos.1 and 3 have stated that the contentions made by the petitioner in the present writ petition are pertains to the office of respondent No.2 – Municipal Council.

It is in this background, we have given thoughtful consideration to the arguments advanced. It is undisputed fact that the Development Plan for the Jalgaon Jamod City came into force on 15/01/2006 and the land was shown reserved for "Garden". Though notice was duly served to respondent Nos.1 and 2 under Section 127 of the Act of 1966 on 30/01/2024, the respondent Municipal Council, did not take any action due to weak financial condition.

Thus, it is crystal clear that during the statutory period of 24 months as mentioned in Section 127 of the Act of 1966, no steps of acquisition of land were taken. Considering the aforesaid facts, following order is passed :-

Rule is made absolute in the above terms.