Breaking Supreme Court Legal Update
New Delhi · Wednesday, 05 August 2026 9888666310 | [email protected]
Free Law — free judgments and free headnotes Free Lawby De Jure
Supreme Court of India 2020-01-29 dismissed

MOHANDAS vs THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS. URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT THROUGH ITS SECRETARY

Bench: 2 — Sanjay Kishan Kaul, K.M. Joseph

In Brief

The Supreme Court dismissed an appeal by landowners whose property was reserved in a Development Plan under the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966. The owners sought to have the reservation quashed, arguing that after a notice under Section 127 (which provides for lapsing of reserved land if not acquired within specified periods), no action was taken. The Court held that because the State had issued an acquisition declaration within ten years of the plan coming into force, the owners had lost the benefit of immediate lapsing. While the Court acknowledged inaction and delay by the authorities, it upheld that a revised Development Plan carrying forward the same reservation did not breach Section 127 where the owners acted after the revised plan was finalized. The Court emphasized that owners must act before a revised plan is published; delayed action thereafter does not invalidate carried-forward reservations.

The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.

Land Acquisition Town Planning Law Constitutional Law Property Rights Land Reservation Statutory Interpretation

Read the full judgment & headnote. It's free.

Register to read the complete Supreme Court judgment text and the headnote, and to search 1 lakh+ Supreme Court judgments by meaning. It is a free service.

Register Free Login