Parimal W/O. Vishram Moharir And Another v. The State Of Maha. Through Principal Secretary, Aseemkumar Gupta, Urban Devpt., Mumbai And ORS.

1 937.cp.37.24

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR CONTEMPT PETITION NO.37/2024 Sau. Parimal W/o. Vishram Moharir and Anr. Vs. The State of Maharashtra and Ors. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Ms Swati Paunikar, Advocate for Petitioners.

Mr. A. S. Fulzele, Addl.G.P. for Respondents/State. Ms Ritu Jog, Advocate for Respondent No.5.

CORAM : NITIN W. SAMBRE AND MRS.VRUSHALI V. JOSHI, JJ.

DATED : 11/12/2024.

.

Heard.

2.

The office of the respondent Collector, Nagpur granted permission for conversion of land Patwari Halka No.37, Survey No.69, admeasuring area 1.80 Hector i.e. around 18000 Sq.Mtr. for residential use from agricultural use. The cancellation of the said order was subject matter of challenge and accordingly, this Court directed the Collector to pass a fresh order after hearing the petitioners. 3.

It appears that the Collector, Nagpur vide communication dated 12.01.2015 recommended to the Urban Development Department of the State Government to permit the conversion of the land of the petitioners to that of non-agricultural use by inserting the said proposal in the list of 149 similar cases. In response to the same, the State Government vide communication dated 12.06.2018 appears to have directed the NMRDA to do the needful in the matter thereby granting approval not only for conversion to residential use, but also approve of layout.

2 937.cp.37.24 4.

The contempt is alleged as the petitioners, who have transfered the land in question by demarcating the same into layout to various plot holders as to the in action of approval of layout plan. It is claimed that the collective action of the State Government, the respondent Corporation and its officers so also of NMRDA amounts to contempt as the orders of this Court of which the contempt is alleged is not followed.

5.

The Collector, Nagpur, who is a respondent has sworn an affidavit thereby stating that it is NMRDA, who is Competent Authority, who can approve layout plan. 6.

In this background, having regard to the fact that there was recommendation by the Collector way back in 2015 of insertion of the proposal of the petitioners in the list of the layout, which are to be converted to residential use, and in view of change in the Planning Authority i.e. NMRDA, it was expected of the NMRDA to comply with the order.

7.

We direct the learned Counsel appearing for the newly added respondent No.6 to accept notice for NMRDA and submit reply as regards the action taken in any case by 13.01.2025.

8.

The respondent No.6 NMRDA shall be sensitive to the factual matrix viz. the N.A. permission granted by the Collector has led to the creation of third party rights by the petitioner.

9.

We permit the petitioners to appear before the Joint Director, Town Planning with all the relevant

3 937.cp.37.24 documents and the orders of this Court including that of the order of Revenue Authorities and the State Government on 16.12.2024.

10.

Stand over to 16.12.2024.

(MRS. VRUSHALI V. JOSHI, J.) (NITIN W. SAMBRE, J.) RGurnule Signed by: Mrs. R.M. MANDADE Designation: PA To Honourable Judge Date: 13/12/2024 10:28:47