### Reservation Lapses Upon Failure to Acquire Land Within Statutory Period Following Valid Section 127 Purchase Notice Summary: The Bombay High Court held that a reservation under the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 (MRTP Act) lapses by operation of law if the Planning Authority fails to take steps for acquisition within the prescribed statutory period after service of a purchase notice under Section 127. The Court rejected the Corporation’s technical objections regarding the non-traceability of the notice and its "composite" nature (invoking both Sections 37 and 127), ruling that as long as the notice clearly indicates the owner's intent and is acted upon by the authority, it constitutes valid service. Furthermore, once reservation lapses by operation of law, subsequent changes to the reservation in a revised Development Plan are a nullity, and the right of the owner cannot be defeated by the plea of delay and laches.

The Petitioner, a co-operative housing society, purchased lands at Village Karvenagar (Survey Nos. 39/1 and 40/1) on 02/08/2000

These lands were reserved for a "High School" (HS-15) under the Development Plans of 1966 and 1987

On 18/09/2001, the Petitioner served a purchase notice under Section 127 of the MRTP Act, 1966, which was received by the Pune Municipal Corporation (PMC) on 26/09/2001

Although PMC initiated some acquisition steps (resolutions and agreements) between 2002 and 2007, the acquisition was never completed

In 2013, PMC changed the reservation from "High School" to "Playground" (PG-34) in the revised draft plan

The Petitioner filed these petitions seeking a declaration that the reservation had lapsed due to the failure to acquire the land within six months of the 2001 notice

1. Whether the purchase notice dated 18/09/2001 was duly served on the Planning Authority and whether its "composite" nature (invoking both Section 37 and 127) invalidated it.

2. Whether the reservation of the subject land lapsed by operation of law under Section 127 of the MRTP Act due to the failure of the Corporation to take "steps for acquisition" within the statutory period.

3. Whether the subsequent change in reservation in the 2013 Development Plan is valid if the original reservation had already lapsed.

The Court applied Section 127 of the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning (MRTP) Act, 1966 (pre-amendment version), which stipulates that if a reserved land is not acquired within ten years of the final plan, the owner may serve a purchase notice; if no steps for acquisition occur within six months of service, the reservation is deemed to have lapsed

It followed the principle that the "steps for acquisition" must be effective steps that lead to the vesting of the land

The Court also addressed the state's obligation to act fairly under Article 14, noting that technical objections regarding the receipt of notice or service on specific desks within a Corporation cannot defeat the statutory rights of a property owner

The Court rejected the Corporation’s claim that the notice was not received or was untraceable, citing the Corporation’s own internal correspondence and RTI responses confirming receipt on 26/09/2001 and subsequent forwarding to the City Engineer

The Court held that PMC’s action of passing resolutions and entering an acquisition agreement after the notice proved they understood it as a valid Section 127 notice

Furthermore, the Court clarified that a "composite notice" requesting both minor modification (Sec. 37) and purchase (Sec. 127) is not prohibited, provided the statutory requirements of Section 127 are met

Since PMC failed to complete the acquisition within the six-month window following the 2001 notice, the reservation lapsed by operation of law

Consequently, once the reservation lapsed, the land became free, and any subsequent re-designation or change in reservation in a future Development Plan was a nullity regarding that specific land

It declared the land released from reservation and available to the Petitioner for development as per the user of adjacent lands

The Court ordered that the Corporation’s failure to conclude acquisition proceedings cannot deprive the Petitioner of the legal consequence of lapsing

All interim applications and the second petition challenging the change in reservation (WP 5525/2016) were disposed of as no longer surviving