Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

10.0 Mr. K.S. Nanavati, learned Sr. Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner-Company, submitted that the respondent-authorities have shown no justifiable reasons for not complying with the directions issued by this Court vide its order dated 27.04.2007 passed in S.C.A. No.22819/2005. He submitted that the petitioner-Company was not given any opportunity of being heard before publication of the impugned Notification dated 30.01.2009 by which the Final Plot No.27 had been varied.

10.1 Learned Sr. Counsel Mr. Nanavati submitted that the respondent-authorities have committed violation of the provisions of Section 45 of the said Act, which deals with re-constitution of Plot in the draft Town Planning Scheme, inasmuch as no consent of the owners of the lands were obtained before allotting a common Final Plot number. The authorities concerned have also not considered the registered sale deed executed by respondent no.4 for certain Plots in favour of the erstwhile Company - Nima Private Ltd., which are presently owned and occupied by the petitioner. He submitted that had the said fact been taken into consideration, the error of allotting a common Final Plot number to separate parties in the Town Planning Scheme finalized in the year 2000 would not have arisen.

22. In reality, said Nima Private Ltd. were the owners of the land bearing Survey Nos.129/1, 128, 129/3, 130, 131, 133, 127, 124/1 and 124/2, whereas, respondent no.4 is the owner of the rest of the survey nos., viz. survey nos.125, 126, 129 & 135. Therefore, two different Final Plot numbers ought to have been given for the lands owned by two different owners. Instead, a common Final Plot has been given, as aforesaid. Thus, the allotment was in violation of the provisions of sub-section (2) of Section 45 of the said Act.

23.1 A bare perusal of the above order of this Court makes one to believe that this Court had directed the authority concerned to hear the affected parties, including the petitioner herein, for the purpose of allotting separate Final Plot numbers. The said direction was issued on the ground that erroneously a common Final Plot number had been allotted in respect of lands belonging to two separate owners and in respect of which the Notification dated 16.08.2000 had already been published by the State Government. Therefore, to see that two different Final Plot numbers are given for the lands owned by two different owners, this Court had issued the above direction.