1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.251 OF 2008 Punamchand s/o Jaganlal Pirthani, Age-66 years, Occu:Business, R/o-Tilak Nagar, Kannad, Tq-Kannad, Dist-Aurangabad. ...PETITIONER. VERSUS 1) The State of Maharashtra, Through Secretary, Land Acquisition Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai, 2) The Secretary, Town Development Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai, 3) The Director of Town Planning, Maharashtra State, Pune, 4) The Deputy Director of Town Planning, Aurangabad Division, Aurangabad, 5) The Collector, Aurangabad, Tq. & Dist-Aurangabad, 6) The Special Land Acquisition Officer, Krushna Khore Vikas Mahamandal, Aurangabad, Tq. & Dist-Aurangabad. 7) The Cheif Officer, Municipal Council, Kannad, Tq- Kannad, Dist-Aurangabad. ...RESPONDENTS. 2 ... Shri.D.J. Choudhari Advocate for Petitioner. Shri.R.P. Phatke, A.G.P. for Respondent Nos. 1 to 6. Shri. L.D. Vakil Advocate for Respondent No.7. ... CORAM: NARESH H. PATIL AND K.K. TATED, JJ. DATE : 30TH JUNE, 2010. ORAL JUDGMENT (PER NARESH H. PATIL, J.) : 1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. By consent of the learned counsel for the parties, the matter is taken up for final hearing at the admission stage. 2. The Petitioner's contention is that he is owner and possessor of land Survey No.40/5-A to the extent of 24.5 R situated at Kannad, Tq- Kannad, Dist-Kannad. The said land was proposed to be acquired for play ground vide Reservation No.6 by issuing notification dated 8th May, 1992. The Petitioner contends that on 1st August, 1996 the Municipal Council, Kannad passed resolution 3 stating therein that as they do not have funds to invest, the Reservation No.6 be cancelled. The Petitioner was continuously persuading the Authorities either to acquire the property or to drop the reservation and make the land available to the Petitioner. The Petitioner issued notice dated 4th August, 2001. In the meanwhile the Special Land Acquisition Officer issued Notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act on 16th July, 2003 in respect of the Petitioner's land. The Special Land Acquisition Officer issued letter dated 20th November, 2003 to the Chief Officer, Municipal Council, Kannad and directed him to deposit 2/3 amount of the total estimated amount of Rs.46,15,000/- immediately. On 20th January, 2004 the General Body meeting of the Municipal Council, Kannad discussed the issue and as it was found that there were no funds with the Municipal Council, therefore they resolved to request the Government to cancel the Reservation No.6. On 25th December, 2004 the Petitioner issued notice under 4 Section 127 of the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 to the Municipal Council, Kannad and requested to drop the reservation. The Respondent No.7 addressed a communication dated 25th July, 2006 to the Secretary, Town Development Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai stating therein that the Deputy Director of Town Planning, Aurangabad had recommended the proposal on 17th May, 2004 to cancel the Reservation No.6. The State Authorities called report from the Chief Officer, Municipal Council, Kannad, which was forwarded on 29th July, 2006 detailing out the facts and making a request to cancel the reservation. Again the General Body of Municipal Council, Kannad, according to the Petitioner, discussed the issue on 30th September, 2006 and resolved that as the Government is not willing to cancel the reservation, it should be requested to the Government to advance loan to the tune of 50% amount and 50% amount by way of grant. The State Government reiterated its stand not to cancel the reservation and issued direction to Municipal 5 Council to make arrangement of 25% funds for the provisions of land acquisition. By communication dated 29th December, 2006 the Chief Officer, Municipal Council, Kannad issued letter to the Collector, Aurangabad and requested to acquire the land in question in view of the resolution dated 30th September, 2006. The communication dated 17th May, 2007 was forwarded by the Deputy Director of Town Planning to the Director of Town Planning to relax the condition of depositing 2/3 amount of total compensation in advance. 3. The Petitioner submits that in view of the aforesaid developments, the property is locked without any development since the year 1992. Inspite of issuance of Notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, further steps are not taken. The Municipal Council did not deposit amount with the Special Land Acquisition Officer. Ultimately, the issue was kept hanging. 4. During the course of hearing, the learned 6 counsel appearing for the Municipal Council, on instructions, submitted that there are other pieces of land adjacent to the present site, to be used for play ground. The Municipal Council does not require subject land for the use of play ground. Even otherwise, the Municipal Council does not have sufficient funds to invest towards the compensation. 5. The learned A.G.P. submits that the State is desirous to continue the reservation as the land is reserved for play ground which is in the public interest; but the Municipal Council, acquiring body, will have to share the burden of finances. 6. Learned counsel for the Petitioner was right in his contention that the Petitioner is not at fault. The land of the Petitioner was reserved since the year 1992. The local body is reiterating its stand that they are not in a position to pay for the compensation and they do not require the 7 land. In this scenario, some outer limit has to be put for the Authorities to consider and complete the acquisition proceedings in respect of the subject land or to drop the reservation. 7. In the facts of the case and in view of developments which have taken place since the year 1992, we find that the request made by the Petitioner requires consideration by this Court, at least at this stage. As the responsible Authorities are taking independent stand and in view of the fact that the Municipal Council does not require this land for the reasons stated above, directions will have to be issued to the Respondents. 8. We therefore, direct the Respondent Municipal Council, Collector, State Authorities to complete the acquisition proceedings in respect of reservation of the land Survey No.40/5-A to the extent of 24.5 R situated at Kannad, Tq-Kannad, Dist-Kannad reserved for play ground, pass an 8 award and make payment to the Petitioner within one year from today. In case the Collector/ Special Land Acquisition Officer fails to pass an award and make payment to the Petitioner during the period of one year, the Reservation No.6 will be deemed to have lapsed and cancelled and the subject land would stand released in favour of the Petitioner. 8. Rule is made absolute on the terms indicated above. . Authenticated copy of this order be provided to the learned A.G.P. [K.K. TATED, J.] [NARESH H. PATIL, J.] asb/JUNE10/wp251.08