Bombay High Court
SWASTIK SPACES LTD THROU. DIRECTORversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA THORU. THE SEC. URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPT AND ORS
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
Holding
The Court ordered the respondents to decide the petitioner’s purchase notice within three months, without adjudicating the substantive claim of lapse of reservation.
Summary
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 lapsed and a writ of mandamus directing the State to issue a gazette notification of the lapse. Relying on the Supreme Court decision in Girnar Traders v. State of Maharashtra, the petitioner argued that despite a purchase notice dated 8 May 2023, the competent authority had not acquired the land. The High Court, without addressing the merits, directed the respondents to consider the purchase notice within three months in accordance with law. Consequently, the writ petition was disposed without granting the reliefs sought.
Issues considered
- Whether the market and parking reservations under the 2007 notification have lapsed pursuant to Section 127 of the MRTP Act.
- Whether the court can issue a writ of mandamus directing the State to publish a notification of lapse.
- Whether the competent authority is obligated to act on the purchase notice dated 8 May 2023.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- MRTP Act
- Section 127
- Land reservation
- Lapse of reservation
- Writ of mandamus
- Purchase notice
- Development plan
Judgment
Digitally
signed by
CHITRA
CHITRA SANJAY
SANJAY SONAWANE
SONAWANE Date:
2026.09.29
12:05:52
+0530
Chitra Sonawane. 34-WP-9352-2026.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.9352 OF 2026
Swastik Spaces Ltd .. Petitioner
Vs.
The State of Maharashtra & Ors. ... Respondents.
...
Mr. Abhijit P. Kulkarni a/w Abhishek Roy i/by Sweta Shah for the
Petitioner.
Mrs Neha Bhide, GP a/w Ms Gauri Phadake h/f Manish Kelkar for
R-1/State.
...
CORAM : MAHESH CHANDRA TRIPATHI, CJ. &
ADVAIT M. SETHNA, J.
DATE : 28th SEPTEMBER, 2026.
P.C. :
1. Heard Mr. Abhijit Kulkarni, the learned Counsel for the Petitioner.
2. The instant Petition has been preferred by the Petitioner with
following substantive reliefs :
"b. That this Hon'ble Court be pleased to issue a writ or any
appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature of writ
thereby declaring that the land bearing Survey No. 115/B,
Plot No. 1 reserved for Market Reservation vide reservation
no. 479 admeasuring 1004.31 sq. mtrs., and Parking Lot
Reservation vide reservation no. 480 admeasuring 1448.88
sq. mtrs., total aggregating to 2453.19 sq. mtrs. out of the
total land admeasuring 7348 sq. mtrs., sanctioned through
1
Chitra Sonawane. 34-WP-9352-2026.doc
the notification dated 9th February, 2007 has been lapsed and
released from the said reservation as per the provisions of the
Section 127 of the MRTP Act.
c. That this Hon'ble Court be pleased to issue a writ of
mandamus thereby directing the Respondents to forthwith
notify the lapsing of the said reservation in respect of the said
land by issuing appropriate notification in the official
gazette."
3. Mr. Kulkarni would state that the Petitioner owns a land bearing
Survey No. 115/B, Plot No.1 admeasuring 7348 sq. mtrs. situated at
Village -Gokhivare, Taluka - Vasai, District - Palghar within the limits of
Vasai Virar City Municipal Corporation ("said land" for short). According
to him, some portion of the said land is specified/designated/reserved
under the Development Plan of Vasai Virar Sub Region sanctioned
through the Government Notification dated 9 th February, 2007 reserved
for Market and Parking Lot Reservation, has been lapsed.
4. In view of the order proposed to be passed we are not inclined to
issue notices to the Respondents.
5. The entire claim is set up as per the provisions under Section 127
of the Maharashtra Regional & Town Planning Act, 1966 (for short
"MRTP Act"), on the ground that the final Development Plan was
sanctioned/approved as per the Government Notification dated 9th
February 2007. Since then no concrete steps have been taken to proceed
further in the matter. In support of his submission, he would place
reliance on the decision of the Supreme Court in Girnar Traders Vs. State
2
Chitra Sonawane. 34-WP-9352-2026.doc
of Maharashtra & Ors.1. He would submit that inspite of Purchase Notice
dated 8th May 2023 issued, as envisaged under Section 127 of the MRTP
Act, until date the Respondent/Competent Authority, has not acquired
the land of the Petitioner.
6. Considering the factual situation as emerged in this Petition, we
direct the Respondent/Competent Authority to consider/decide the
Purchase Notice of the Petitioner dated 8th May 2023, within 3 months,
in accordance with law.
7. We make it clear that we have not adverted to the merits of the
matter.
8. In the aforesaid terms, the Writ Petition stands Disposed Of.
[ADVAIT M. SETHNA, J.] [CHIEF JUSTICE]
1 (2007)7 SCC 555.
3
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.