Nashik Landowners May Develop 30,000 Sq M Garden-Reserved Land After Bombay HC Finds Corporation Received Section 127 Notice But Took No Acquisition Steps

The petitioners claimed ownership of land at Kamatwada, Nashik, measuring approximately 33,500 sq. m., reserved as a garden under Reservation No. 39 in the Nashik Development Plan, which came into force on 16 November 1993.

On 24 March 2004, they issued a purchase notice under Section 127 of the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 (MRTP Act), seeking acquisition of the land. The Corporation disputed receiving the notice and alleged that its acknowledgment was fabricated.

The petitioners sought recognition that the reservation had lapsed and consideration of their layout proposal.

During the proceedings, the Corporation’s own communications to the State recorded that the notice had been received on 24 March 2004, no acquisition steps had been taken, and the reservation had lapsed.

The petition was admitted, with interim relief permitting the petitioners to submit a layout plan and develop at their own risk, subject to the petition’s outcome.

Section 127 of the MRTP Act, as applicable at the relevant time, provides that where land reserved or designated in a development plan has not been acquired within ten years of the plan coming into force, the owner or an interested person may serve a purchase notice on the authority. If the land is not acquired, or steps for acquisition are not taken, within six months after service of the notice, the reservation is deemed to have lapsed and the land becomes available for development or use permissible for adjacent land under the relevant plan.

Section 136 was invoked by the Corporation concerning service of notices, but the Court found it unnecessary to resolve that objection in light of the Corporation’s subsequent admission that it had received the notice.

The Court relied on the Corporation’s later communications to the State, which expressly recorded receipt of the purchase notice on 24 March 2004 and the absence of any acquisition proposal or steps to acquire the land.

Those admissions resolved the earlier factual dispute over receipt and undermined the Corporation’s reliance on affidavits denying service or alleging fabrication.

Since no acquisition steps were taken within six months of receipt, the statutory consequence under Section 127 followed. The Court therefore held that the Section 136 objection did not alter the result.

The writ petition was made absolute, with no order as to costs.