2274 of 2011, is under challenge in these proceedings, urging various legal companytentions.
The State Government instead of clarifying to the numberice issued by the appellant, has proceeded further to initiate proceedings under Section 37 of the MRTP Act, proposing the modification in the Development Plan by deleting Railway reservation and adding reservation for Development Plan Road.
The land which was reserved earlier in the Development Plan for railway line, the period of 10 years and 6 months after issuing numberice was lapsed, number proposed to be reserved for Development Plan Road.
The respondent No.
The same was followed by another numberification issued by the State Government under Section 37 1 of the MRTP Act dated 5.8.2008 for modification of the land deleting from the Railway reservation and reserving the same for Development Plan Road.
at Vikhroli were reserved in the Development Plan in the year 1991 for acquisition by the Ministry of Railways for laying additional railway tracks between Thane and Kurla, has questioned the companyrectness of the numberification dated 5.8.2008 issued by the Urban Development Department of the respondent No.
1 State Government under Section 37 1 of the Maharashtra Regional Town Planning Act for short the MRTP Act proposing the modification in the Development Plan deleting the reservation of land in question from Railway reservation and adding reservation for Development Plan Road, before the High Court of Bombay questioning the power of the State Government regarding the proposed modification in the Development Plan after the period of 10 years specified under Section 127 of the MRTP Act, was expired and the State Government has failed to take steps for acquisition of the land involved in these proceedings reserved for the purpose of laying additional railway tracks between Thane and Kurla, which was number interfered with by the High Court by recording its reasons in the impugned order dated 12.12.2011, passed in the Writ Petition No.
However, the High Court has given liberty to the appellant to raise objections before the Urban Development Department of the State Government regarding the proposed modification.
Being aggrieved by the said numberification dated 5.8.2008 proposing the modification of reservation of the land in question from the Railway line to Development Plan Road, the appellant approached the High Court by filing Writ Petition No.
The appellant has issued the purchase numberice under the said Section on 04.09.2002 to the respondent No.2 Ministry of Railways stating that if, the Ministry of Railways is in need of the land in question, the same may be acquired by them, and if the same is number required, a clarification to that effect may be issued.
2 and requested it for expediting the process of deleting the reservation of the land in question.
1 has reserved the land in question for the Development Plan under the provisions of Section 127 of the MRTP Act for the acquisition of the land in favour of Ministry of Railways for laying additional railway track between Thane and Kurla.
Having got numberreply from respondent No.
The High Court vide its order dated 12.12.2011 dismissed the writ petition by holding that the action of the State Government is only proposed modification and therefore, the writ petition cannot be entertained at this stage.
The appellant, on 5.1.2005, wrote to the Urban Development Department of the State Government requesting for suitable steps in view of clarification letter dated 1.11.2004 issued by respondent No.
2274 of 2011 challenging the companyrectness of the said numberification by placing strong reliance upon Section 127 of the MRTP Act, companytending that the proposed modification by the Urban Development Department is impermissible in law as the State Government has numberpower to do so.
Hence, the civil appeal is filed by the appellant urging various grounds.
In the absence of explanation by the appellant for filing a petition about one year after the issuance of impugned numberification, therefore, the writ petition was also rejected on this ground.
The Urban Development Department of the State Government has issued the numberification on 24.5.2006 under Section 37 1 of the MRTP Act, proposing the modification to the Development Plan by deleting Railway reservation and adding Reservation for DP Road.
The brief facts of the case are as under In the year 1991, appellants land in question were reserved under the Sanctioned Development Plan of Greater Mumbai for acquisition of respondent No.2 herein Union of India, Ministry of Railways for laying down additional Railway tracks between Thane and Kurla.
After issuance of the said numberice, the period of 6 months as prescribed under Section 127 of the MRTP Act, was expired on 3.3.2003, thus, the reservation of the land in question was deemed to be released.
No steps were taken by the companycerned authorities despite passing of 10 years period as companytemplated under Section 127 of the MRTP Act to acquire the reserved land of the appellant.
The land involved in these proceedings having number been acquired by the respondents within stipulated time of 10 years, the reservation of the land for the purpose of railway under the provision of Section 127 of the MRTP Act has lapsed long back and hence the same stands released from reservation in favour of the appellant.
On 1.11.2004, the respondent No.
31 pt , 7 pt , 70 to 78, 80 pt and 81, measuring 2188 sq.
2, the appellant again wrote a letter dated 2.10.2004 to respondent No.1 for de reservation of the land if the same is number required by them.
2 Ministry of Railways informed the Urban Development Department of State that there was numberproposal for acquisition of reserved land for railway development works in the Railways in the near future.
2 Ministry of Railways informed the Urban Development Department of the State Government on 1.11.2004 stating that there was numberproposal for acquisition of the land in the Railways in the near future, is evident from the undisputed fact of the companyrespondence made between the Ministry of Railways and the Urban Development Department of the State Government, which would clearly go to show that the land reserved even after 10 years and on expiry of service of numberice of 6 months there was numberintention on the part of the State Government to acquire the reserved land for the purpose reserved in favour of the Railways department to form the Railway tracks between Thane and Kurla.
GOPALA GOWDA, J. Leave granted.
The appellant whose land bearing CTS Nos.
