Created by Fuzzy Cloud | Our 2nd AI-Powered Solution
29 judgments · newest first · showing 1–29
Petitioners Ahmed Akbar Momin and another challenged the registration of an FIR under Sections 52 and 53 of the Maharashtra Regional Town Planning Act, 1966, alleging that the construction on the disputed property was illegal but that no cognizable offence existed and a preliminary inquiry was …
Swastik Spaces Ltd, the petitioner, owns land in Vasai Virar and claims that portions reserved for market and parking under a 2007 government notification have lapsed under Section 127 of the Maharashtra Regional & Town Planning Act, 1966. The petitioner sought a declaration that the reservation had …
The Ghar Bachav Samiti filed a writ petition under Article 226 seeking a declaration that the reservation of certain land in Pune, made in the Revised Development Plan of 2005 and later modified in 2014, was illegal and void under Section 127 of the Maharashtra Regional Town Planning Act, 1966. The …
The petitioner, Prakash Kuvarji Gala, filed a writ petition seeking directions to the State of Maharashtra and related authorities to demolish illegal constructions allegedly protected by a civil suit. The petitioner alleged that the municipal corporation (Respondents 1‑5) was not acting on his …
The petitioners, Indus Towers Ltd. and an individual, sought to quash FIR No. 37 of 2020 registered under Section 53(7) of the Maharashtra Regional Town Planning Act (MRTP Act) for allegedly unauthorised erection of a telecom tower. The municipal council had issued a 15‑day notice under Section 189 …
The petitioner, Saloman Mathew Tuscano, filed a writ petition seeking a direction that the Vasai Virar Municipal Corporation (VVCMC) take the notice issued under Section 53 of the Maharashtra Regional Town Planning Act, 1966 to its logical end. The respondents had issued a notice in December 2013 …
The appellant, a 74‑year‑old senior citizen, has lived in Shed No.16, Dolarwadi, Mumbai for over six decades and claims the ground‑floor structure was an old residential building existing before the 17 April 1964 datum line. The Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai (MCGM) issued a notice under …
Mrs. Tilottama Ganesh Landge owned land reserved for a 7.50‑metre road widening under a Development Plan notified on 18 September 1995. The ten‑year period for acquisition expired on 19 September 2005, after which she served a purchase notice under Section 127 of the Maharashtra Regional & Town …
The petitioners, a family of landowners, owned land reserved in 1995 for a 7.50‑metre road widening under the Development Plan of Pimpri‑Chinchwad. The ten‑year period for acquisition expired in 2005 and, after a long delay, the petitioners served a purchase notice under Section 127 of the …
The petitioners, a family of landowners, owned land reserved in 1995 for the widening of an 18‑metre HCMTR road under the Development Plan of Pimpri‑Chinchwad. After the statutory ten‑year period expired in 2005, they served a purchase notice under Section 127 of the Maharashtra Regional & Town …
The petitioners, legal heirs of a deceased landowner, own 1500 sq. m. of land in Nashik that was reserved in the 1993 Development Plan for an electric sub‑station and a post office. After the acquiring agency withdrew the proposal and the petitioners served a valid purchase notice under Section 127 …
The applicant, Sadhu @ Sahadev Shankar Katke, was convicted under Section 52 read with Section 43 of the Maharashtra Regional Town Planning Act, 1966 for alleged unauthorised construction, based primarily on an inspection report prepared by a junior engineer. The report contained a date discrepancy …
The petitioner filed a writ petition in 2015 challenging a notice issued under Section 53(i) of the Maharashtra Regional & Town Planning Act, 1966 by the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai (MCGM), seeking a stay of any coercive or penal action. The court ordered a fresh inspection of the …
The dispute concerned a 2,005‑sq‑m parcel in Malad, Mumbai, originally declared a slum and reserved as Recreational Ground under the 1991 Development Plan. Jyoti Builders (appellant) claimed that the 2015 order of the CEO‑SRA required the State Government to acquire the land under s.14(1) of the …
The appellants, owners of land in Mumbai, challenged the municipal corporation’s acquisition of their property for a link road, arguing that the road could only be built after amending the Development Plan under the Maharashtra Regional Town Planning Act (MRTP Act). The High Court upheld the …
The appellants surrendered a 66,372.82 sq. m. parcel of land in Pune to the Municipal Corporation under a scheme that promised Transferable Development Rights (TDR) at 100% Floor Space Index (FSI) as compensation for the land reserved for a park. The State, invoking the land's classification as a …
The Nagpur Improvement Trust (NIT) had framed an improvement scheme in 1964 that provided for a 15‑metre internal road. After the Maharashtra Regional Town Planning Act (MRTP Act) came into force, the final Development Plans (DP) prepared under the MRTP Act in 1976, 1989 and 2001 omitted any such …
The appellant's land was reserved for a primary school under a development plan and a purchase notice was served under Section 49 of the Maharashtra Regional Town Planning Act, 1966. The State Government confirmed the notice and the appropriate authority filed an acquisition proposal within the …
Godrej & Boyce Manufacturing Co. Ltd. owned land in Vikhroli that was reserved in the 1991 Development Plan for acquisition by the Ministry of Railways to lay additional tracks. The reservation required acquisition within ten years or, failing that, the landowner could serve a notice and, if no …
Parag Construction and other appellants bought land in Borivali (Final Plots 22A, 228 and 22C) at a court auction in 1981 and later challenged the acquisition of that land by the arbitrator under the Maharashtra Regional Town Planning Act, 1966, arguing that they were not given notice and therefore …
The charitable trust Ekta Mahila Mandal constructed rooms and a playground on a 770 sq.m plot in the N‑7 sector of CIDCO, which was earmarked as a green belt under the development plan. The trust sought regularisation of the plot for a primary school, invoking Article 21A of the Constitution as a …
The Promoters & Builders Association of Pune challenged a modification to Pune's Development Control Rules (DCR) wherein the State Government, while sanctioning the Municipal Corporation's proposal under Section 37(2) of the Maharashtra Regional Town Planning Act, 1966, inserted the words "from the …
The City and Industrial Development Corporation of Maharashtra (CIDCO) allotted a commercial plot to original allottees, who transferred it to the appellants. CIDCO accepted transfer fees and full lease premium, executed lease and confirmation deeds, and issued development permission and …
The Mahatma Gandhi Mission, a charitable trust, sought land from CIDCO for a college, hospital, club, stadium and staff quarters. While agreements were executed for the college, hospital, club and stadium, no deed or possession was ever given for the staff quarters. CIDCO cancelled the allotment of …
The case concerned a scheme under the Maharashtra Regional & Town Planning Act, 1966 for reserving land for stables and a road, which was later modified to reserve the same land for informal housing and stables. The original reservation was deleted and a corrigendum restored the status quo ante with …
The petitioners challenged a notification issued under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 for acquiring land in Pandharpur to extend an existing state transport bus stand and depot. They argued that the land, reserved for residential use under the Maharashtra Regional Town Planning Act, …
The State of Maharashtra acquired land under the Maharashtra Regional & Town Planning Act, 1966 after the Act was amended to include a three‑year limit for publishing a declaration under s.126(2). The petitioners challenged the acquisition, arguing that the amendment applied only to pending …
Star Enterprises and other appellants submitted the highest monetary offers for lease of plots in response to a public tender issued by the City and Industrial Development Corporation (CIDC) of Maharashtra, a government company acting as a New Town Development Authority. The CIDC rejected these …
The Supreme Court examined a public‑interest litigation concerning a plot of land in Andheri reserved for a BEST bus depot under the development plan. The BEST Committee approved a scheme to construct two commercial buildings on part of the plot, generating a non‑refundable premium for the …
