Facts
The Petitioner owns land at Survey No. 317 (Hissa No. 3, 4 & 12E) in Virar, Palghar
Source reference: p. 1-2Under the Development Plan sanctioned on February 9, 2007, the land was reserved for a Market Garden, Community Center, and a 20-meter D.P. Road
Source reference: p. 2, para. 4The Respondents failed to acquire the land within the statutory ten-year period, which expired on February 9, 2017
Source reference: p. 3, para. 4Consequently, the Petitioner served a purchase notice under Section 127 of the MRTP Act on March 28, 2018
Source reference: p. 3, para. 4The Respondents did not respond or initiate acquisition within the statutory timeframe following the notice
Source reference: p. 3, para. 4.1In March 2025, during the pendency of this petition, the Corporation admitted the reservation had lapsed but offered compensation only in the form of TDR due to budgetary constraints
Source reference: p. 3, para. 5-5.1Issues
1. Whether the reservation on the Petitioner's land lapsed by operation of law due to the Respondents' failure to acquire the land within the statutory period following the Section 127 notice
Source reference: p. 2, para. 22. Whether the Respondents are legally obligated to notify the lapsing of the reservation in the Official Gazette
Source reference: p. 5, para. 10(b)Law Applied
The court applied Section 127 of the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 (MRTP Act), which dictates that if reserved land is not acquired within ten years of the Development Plan and further within twenty-four months (as per the amended act) of a valid purchase notice, the reservation shall be deemed to have lapsed
Source reference: p. 2, 4It relied on the precedent in Shivgonda Anna Patil v. Sangli Miraj and Kupwad City Municipal Corporation (2023), confirming that the effect of lapsing is automatic and does not require a judicial declaration
Source reference: p. 4, para. 8Reasoning
The Court found that the ten-year period for acquisition ended in 2017, and the Petitioner thereafter served a valid notice under Section 127 in 2018
Source reference: p. 3The Respondents failed to take effective steps toward acquisition within the subsequent statutory period.
Source reference: no citationThe Court dismissed the Corporation’s 2025 communication—offering TDR in lieu of monetary compensation—as a "purely an afterthought" intended to create a record after a significant delay
Source reference: p. 4, para. 5.2The Court observed that the authorities ignored settled law and harassed the citizen by failing to notify the lapsing
Source reference: p. 4, para. 7, 9Since the statutory conditions of Section 127 were met, the reservation lapsed automatically by operation of law, regardless of the Corporation's internal budgetary constraints
Source reference: p. 3, para. 5; p. 4, para. 6Holding
The Court allowed the petition, declaring that the reservation on the Petitioner’s land has lapsed under Section 127(1) of the MRTP Act
The Court held that the consequences of a purchase notice are automatic and mandatory
Source reference: p. 4, para. 8The State Government was directed to notify the lapsing of the reservation by publishing it in the Official Gazette as per Section 127(2) of the MRTP Act within six weeks
Source reference: p. 5, para. 10(b)Rule was made absolute
Source reference: p. 5, para. 11Original Court PDF
Darpan Narendra ThakurvsState Of Maharashtra Thr The Urban Development And Town Planning Dept And Ors
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in