The Supreme Court of India recently delivered a significant judgment emphasizing that land reserved for public purposes cannot be kept in limbo indefinitely without acquisition. The Court ruled that if the land is not acquired within the timeline prescribed under Section 127 of the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act (MRTP Act), 1966, the reservation shall be deemed to have lapsed. This decision came in the case of Nirmiti Developers vs State of Maharashtra, where the Court declared that the reservation of a plot of land had lapsed due to the authorities' failure to acquire it within the stipulated time.
"The landowner cannot be deprived of the use of the land for years together. Once an embargo has been put on a landowner not to use the land in a particular manner, the said restriction cannot be kept open-ended for an indefinite period."
Supreme Court Bench of Justices J.B. Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan
Read Also:- Supreme Court Clears Former Drug Company Director of Charges for Substandard Drugs Seized Post-Resignation
Background of the Case:
The case revolved around a vacant plot of land measuring 50,138 sq. ft. in Amravati, Maharashtra. The land was originally part of a larger plot owned by three individuals. In 1993, a revised development plan under the MRTP Act reserved this land for a private school. However, for over 13 years, no steps were taken to acquire the land.
In 2006, the original owners served a purchase notice under Section 49 of the MRTP Act, asking the State to either acquire the land or release it from reservation. The State acknowledged the notice in 2007 but failed to initiate acquisition proceedings within the mandatory one-year period. Consequently, the reservation lapsed under Section 49(7) of the MRTP Act.
In 2015, the land was sold to Nirmiti Developers, who filed a writ petition seeking either compensation for the land or a declaration that the reservation had lapsed. The High Court disposed of the petition, granting the appellants the liberty to take appropriate legal steps. Dissatisfied, Nirmiti Developers approached the Supreme Court.
Supreme Court's Observations:
Timeline Under Section 127 is Sacrosanct: The Court emphasized that the timeline provided under Section 127 of the MRTP Act is mandatory. If the land is not acquired within 10 years of the final development plan or if no steps are taken for acquisition within 12 months of a purchase notice, the reservation lapses automatically.
Reservation Lapsed in 2008: The Court noted that the reservation had already lapsed on 02-01-2008, as the authorities failed to initiate acquisition proceedings within one year of confirming the purchase notice. Therefore, when the land was sold to Nirmiti Developers in 2015, there was no reservation on the property.
Inordinate Delay by Authorities: The Court expressed its dismay over the 33-year delay in acquiring the land, stating that it made no sense to keep the land reserved for such an extended period without taking any action. The authorities neither allowed the original owners to use the land nor permitted the purchasers to develop it.
Reliance on Precedents: The Court referred to several precedents, including Chhabildas v. State of Maharashtra and Kolhapur Municipal Corporation v. Vasant Mahadev Patil, where it was held that once a reservation lapses under Section 127, the land becomes free for the owner to use as per permissible purposes.
Read Also:- Supreme Court Denies Relief To HD Kumaraswamy In Corruption Case Over Land Denotification
Court's Decision:
The Supreme Court declared that the reservation of the land had lapsed due to the authorities' failure to acquire it within the prescribed timeline. The Court set aside the High Court's order and ruled in favor of Nirmiti Developers, allowing them to use the land as per the permissible purposes under the town planning scheme.
"Having regard to the gross delay of almost thirty years, even without the aid of Section 127 of the MRTP Act, we would have declared the reservation to have lapsed in exercise of our jurisdiction under Article 142 of the Constitution to do complete justice in the matter."
– Supreme Court
Implications of the Judgment:
- Protection of Landowner Rights: The judgment reinforces the rights of landowners, ensuring that they are not deprived of their property indefinitely without compensation or acquisition.
- Strict Adherence to Timelines: The ruling underscores the importance of adhering to the timelines prescribed under the MRTP Act. Authorities must act promptly to acquire land reserved for public purposes.
- Lapse of Reservation: Once a reservation lapses under Section 127, the land is no longer subject to any restrictions, and the owner can use it as per the permissible purposes under the relevant plan.
Case Name: Nirmiti Developers vs State Of Maharashtra., CIVIL APPEAL NOS.3238-3239 OF 2025
