The Aurangabad Bench of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court was hearing a Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for quashing and setting aside, the Second Revised Development Plan of the Municipal Council, Kopargaon published on 28th December, 2012 to the extent that it sought to once again reserve the plot of the Petitioner for a certain purpose merely with a minor modification to the reservation on the same plot in the previous development plan.

It was the case of the Petitioner that under the previous development plan, the plot of the Petitioner was shown to be reserved for the purpose of Garden, Open Space, Kabrasthan Park and Public Latrine. After 10 years from the notification of the reservation, the Petitioner issued a notice u/s 127 of the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 to the Planning Authority to acquire the property of the Petitioner that had been reserved. However, the Planning Authority did not initiate acquisition proceedings within a period of six months from the notice u/s 127 of the said Act. On this basis, the Petitioner had filed Writ Petition No. 6959 of 2008 before the Bombay High Court for a declaration that reservation on the land of the Petitioner had lapsed. The said Writ Petition was allowed on 31st August, 2009. Despite the fact that the earlier reservation had lapsed, the Planning Authority once again issued a notification on 28th December, 2012 for a revised development plan which inter alia contemplated reservation on the plot of the Petitioner by making cosmetic changes in the purpose for which the plot was reserved in the previous development plan.

The Hon'ble Bombay High Court by its judgement dated 26th February, 2020 allowed the petition for quashing and setting aside the reservation in the revised development plan qua the plot of the Petitioner. While relying upon the judgement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Godrej Boyce Manufacturing Company Limited V/s State of Maharashtra (2015 AIR (SSW) 826) as also the following judgements of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court: - 1) Prafulla C. Dave & Ors. V/s. Municipal Commissioner and Ors. (2008 (3) Mh.LJ 120); 2) Kishor Siddheshwar Wadotkar V/s. Director of Town Planning [2007 (4) MhLJ 427]; 3) Kishor Gopalrao Bapat V/s. State of Maharashtra [2005 4 MhLJ 466]; 4) Dinkar s/o. Balwantrao Kadam V/s. The State of Maharashtra & Ors. [Writ Petition No. 5281 of 2005, decided on 11-02-2016], the Hon'ble Bombay High Court held as under:-

"Having considered the admitted facts of the case at hand and the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Godrej Boyce Manufacturing Company Limited and the Division Benches of this Court discussed supra, we considered that the reservation of the lands in the Second Revised Development Plan of Respondent No. 2 which were declared to be de-reserved by the judgement and order passed by this Court in Writ Petition No. 6959/ 2008, to the extent of said lands is unsustainable and revised development plan dated 28- 12- 2012 impugned in Petition to the extent of said lands is inoperative and inefficacious. The Writ Petition is accordingly partly allowed."¹

By - Chaitanyaa Bhandarkar