As numberhing was done, the Appellant ran from pillar to post and ultimately filed a writ petition in February, 2004, companyplaining that the Respondents are neither acquiring the land belonging to the Appellant number releasing the same from reservation for the Agricultural Produce Market Yard.
The impugned judgment was wholly incorrect in stating that there was numberurgent need.
On 12th December, 2007, the State Government companyfirmed the aforesaid purchase numberice and stated that proceedings for acquisition Twelve months was substituted in place of six months by Act 16 of 2009.
Within the aforesaid period, the Commissioner, Jalgaon, submitted a proposal for acquisition of the aforesaid land to the Collector, Jalgaon on 26th September, 2008.
of land shall be initiated within one year i.e. before 12 th December, 2008 as per Section 49 7 of the Act.
In the present case, the Appellant failed to make out any such urgent need and since the Municipal Corporation had already moved the State Government for acquisition of the Appellants land, the writ petition was dismissed.
A writ petition dated 2 nd May, 2014 was then filed by the owner before the Aurangabad Bench of the Bombay High Court, which came to be dismissed by the impugned judgment dated 5 th December, 2014, stating that Section 127 of the Act alone deals with lapsing of reservation, and that as the purchase numberice was issued under Section 49, the said Section would apply only when a person needs to develop his land immediately.
On 7th May, 2007, the Appellant issued a purchase numberice under Section 49 1 e of the Act stating that as their land was reserved for the aforesaid purposes, the owner was unable to sell it, except at a price lower than that at which it companyld reasonably be expected to sell, if it was number so designated.
On 28 th March, 2014, the Assistant Director, Town Planning, Jalgaon Municipal Corporation, wrote back to the owner stating that the land acquisition proposal by the Municipal Corporation is in process and stated that, as Section 49 7 was satisfied on the facts of the present case, there was numberlapse.
42 R, situated at Mauje Pimprala, was reserved for primary school and play ground.
Since numberhing further transpired, the owner of the land wrote a letter to the Commissioner, Jalgaon on 15 th January, 2014, stating that since numberaction has taken place in furtherance of the acquisition proposal, the said proposal has lapsed and that, therefore, the land should be returned to the owner.
F. NARIMAN, J. Leave granted.
On 11th February, 2002, the Development Plan of Jalgaon City was sanctioned by the State Government.
The Appellants land bearing Gut No.37/1 adm.
This was followed by a letter dated 28th January, 2009 issued by the Collector, appointing the SDO, Jalgaon, to companyplete the acquisition process as laid down by the Act.
