Supreme Court: Dealing with the question that whether, the plan first prepared and notified under Section 21 of the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 (‘MRTP Act’) is the final development plan and the plan prepared under Section 38 is only a revision of the final development plan proposed under Section 21 of the MRTP Act and as such, the notice contemplated under Section 127(2) of the MRTP Act and the period prescribed is from the publication of the development plan first notified under Section 21 and not the revised development plan under Section 38 of MRTP Act , bench of Ranjan Gogoi and R.K. Agrawal, JJ said that under Section 127 of MRTP Act, a notice must be issued by the land owner or any person interested in the land to the authority if no acquisition has been initiated on the land acquired from the owner within ten years from the date on which final development plan has come into force.
In the case which was represented by Jayant Bhushan and Shekhar Naphade, the court further held that after service of the notice a mandatory period of six months has to elapse within which time the authority can still initiate the necessary action. If no acquisition is initiated even after this then only the lapse of reservation can take place.
If there is no such notice by the owner or any person, then there is no question of the reservation, allotment or designation of the land under a development plan of having lapsed. So, then there is no question of the land becoming available to the owner for the purpose of development or otherwise.
In the present case, the notice under Section 127 of MRTP Act by the appellants was issued only two years after the final revised plan under Section 38 of MRTP Act had come into operation and not the period prescribed from the publication of the final development plan notified under Section 21 of MRTP Act. Prafulla C. Dave v. Municipal Commissioner, 2014 SCC OnLine SC 968, decided on 3.12.2014
