Land Reservation Lapses If No Acquisition Steps Taken Within 24 Months Of Purchase Notice Under MRTP Act: Bombay High Court
The Bombay High Court has held that if no steps are commenced for the acquisition of land after the expiry of the stipulated period under Section 127(1) of the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966, the land is deemed to be released from such reservation, allotment or designation. The Court observed that once a valid purchase notice is served and the Planning Authority fails to take steps for acquisition within twenty-four months, the lapse operates by statutory deeming fiction and the authority cannot defeat such consequence by raising technical objections.
A division bench of Justices Ravindra V. Ghuge and Abhay J. Mantri was hearing a writ petition seeking a declaration that the reservation on a land had lapsed under Section 127 of the MRTP Act. The petitioners had purchased the land by a registered sale deed dated 4th March 1991. Under the Development Plan sanctioned on 28th February 1978 and brought into force on 1st March 1978, a portion of the land was reserved for “Housing for dishoused”. After the revised Development Plan came into force, no steps were taken to acquire the land. The Municipal Council did not initiate acquisition proceedings within twenty-four months therefrom. The objection of the Planning Authority was that the purchase notice was defective
The Court rejected this contention. It held that the requirement of submitting title documents along with the notice is intended to facilitate acquisition upon payment of consideration, but once the authority fails to take steps within the statutory period, it cannot resist lapse on the ground of alleged defects in the notice. It observed:
“… after the expiry of the stipulated period of twenty-four months under Section 127 (1)…, if the land is not acquired, or no… are commenced for its acquisition, the land is deemed to be released from such reservation, allotment or designation; in such circumstances, the concerned Authority cannot raise a defence that the purchase notice was defective, as it was not accompanied by the documents showing title or interest in the said land.”
The Court emphasised that the concerned Authority cannot raise a defence of a defective purchase notice for want of a document showing title or interest in the said land, when it failed to take steps to acquire the land within the stipulated period as contemplated by the provisions of the MRTP Act.
The Court clarified that pursuant to a notice under Section 127 of the MRTP Act, the reservation would lapse upon failure to take effective steps to acquire the land, as the acquisition would not be revived merely by passing a resolution.
“In the absence of the steps taken by the Planning Authority, the rights accrued in favour of the owners or persons interested in the land entitle them to issue a purchase notice for the release of their land,” the Court observed.
Accordingly, the writ petition was allowed. The Court directed the Municipal Council to communicate the lapse to the State Government within thirty days.
Case Title: Yakub Salebhai Contractor (Deceased) & Ors. v. State of Maharashtra & Ors. [Writ Petition No. 13965 of 2024]
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Bom) 72