1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.4492 OF 2009 Kailas S/o.Shamaji Shejul, Age-35 years, Occu-Agriculturist, R/o.Aadgaon (B). Tq. And Dist. Aurangabad PETITIONER VERSUS 1. The State of Maharashtra, (Through the Secretary, Industries, Energy and Labour Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai – 400 032) 2. Inspector General of Registration and Collector of Stamps, M.S. Pune, Ground Floor, Opposite to Vidhan Bhavan (Council Hall), New Administration Building, Pune – 411 001. 3. Deputy Inspector General of Registration, Aurangabad Division, Central Administrative Building, 2nd floor (South East Cabin), Collector Office Compound, Aurangabad. 4. Regional Officer, Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation, Aurangabad RESPONDENTS Mr.S.S.Thombre, learned counsel for petitioner Mr.V.B.Ghatge, learned AGP for respondent no.1 to 3 Mr.G.S.Khaire, h/f. Mr.S.S.Dande, learned counsel for respondent no.4. 2 (CORAM : P.V.HARDAS, AND A.V.POTDAR, J.J.) DATE : 17/08/2009 ORAL JUDGMENT : (Per A.V.Potdar, J.) 1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. By consent of the parties, the petition is finally heard at the stage of admission. 2. By the present petition under Article 226 of The Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed for issuance of writ of certiorari to quash and set aside the impugned letters dated 14/11/2007 issued by the Regional Officer, M.I.D.C. Aurangabad, dated 18/12/2007 issued by the Inspector General of Registration and Controller, M.S. Pune and letter dated 02/01/2008 issued by the Deputy Inspector General of Registration, Aurangabad, refusing the registration of the lands notified vide notification dated 04/01/2007. 3. The facts which gave rise to file the present writ petition can be summarized as follows. The petitioner is the owner of agricultural land admeasuring 40 R in land gat no.160, of village Aadgaon (B), situated in Taluka and District Aurangabad. The petitioner is the Karta of his joint Hindu family. As the petitioner is in need of finance for the maintenance of his family, he took decision to sale the land above referred. He has also received purchase money from the intending purchaser. It is alleged that when he inquired with the Sub Registrar, Aurangabad about the registration of the proposed 3 transaction, i.e. the proposed registration, the Sub Registrar refused to register the sale deed as the said land has been notified under the M.I.D. Act of 1961. It is alleged that the petitioner was also informed that his land has been notified under The M.I.D.Act, and the Regional Office of the MIDC has informed the Inspector General of Registration, Pune not to register sale deeds of the lands notified under the M.I.D. Act and accordingly the Inspector General of Registration issued directions to all his sub-ordinates not to register the sale transactions in respect of the lands notified under the said notification. It is also contended that the powers are delegated to the concerned Deputy Collectors, Sub Divisional Officers, and Special Land Acquisition Officers u/s. 32, 36 and 38 of the M.I.D.Act. It is alleged that even though the lands are notified under the industrial area under the M.I.D. Act, yet no acquisition proceedings are started or notification u/s. 32(1) has been issued by the Government. Therefore, it is averred that neither the M.I.D.C. nor the Regional Office have any authority to stop registration of the sale deeds until the lands are acquired and handed over to the Development Authority under the provisions of The Maharashtra Industrial Development Act, 1961. Hence, the petitioner has preferred the present writ petition. 4. Today when the writ petition appeared on the board, we heard respective counsels for the parties. 5. During the course of submissions across the bar, learned 4 counsel appearing for the petitioner took us through the provisions of the M.I.D. Act. During the course of arguments, reliance is also placed on the unreported judgment dated 11/07/2008 in writ petition nos. 3800/2008 and 6300/2008. Reliance is also placed on un-reported judgment in Writ petition no.3941, 3944, 4193, 4194 of 2009, dated 14/08/2009 to which both of us are members of the Bench. It is brought to our notice that under Chapter VI of the M.I.D. Act deals with the acquisition and disposal of land and Section 32(1) of the said Act deals with the compulsory acquisition. On bare reading of this section, it is evident that if at any time, in the opinion of the State Government, any land is required for the purpose of development of the Corporation, then the State Government may acquire such lands by publishing in the official gazette a notice specifying particulars for which the land is to be acquired. Sub Section (2) of Section 32 contemplates that before publishing such notice the State Government shall, by another notice under sub section (1) of Section 32, call upon objections from the owners of the lands to be acquired for the said purpose. Admittedly, no steps are taken by respondents for acquisition as required u/s. 32(1) and (3) of the said Act. In absence of any steps taken under these provisions of the said Act, issuance of directions prohibiting the transfer of lands in the notified area itself is without jurisdiction. 6. In the premise, the directions issued vide impugned letters are without any jurisdiction and hence liable to be quashed and set aside. Accordingly, we quash and set aside the orders and 5 communication impugned dated 14/11/2007, 18/12/2007 and 02/01/2008. 7. In the result, the petition succeeds. Rule is thus made absolute in terms of prayer clause “A”. Writ petition stands disposed of with no order as to costs. (A.V.POTDAR, J.) (P.V.HARDAS, J.) khs/AUGUST 2009/wp4492-09