Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

3. Detailed layout map wherein showing the works carried out in the South Zone is produced herewith and marked as Annexure-R22.

4. Detailed layout map indicating the formation of roads in the North Zone in the enclosed layout map which is marked as Annexure-R23."

6. It is contended that the above facts demonstrate that there was no negligence and dereliction in performance of the duty by the Mysore Urban Development Authority in substantially implementing the scheme and therefore, merely on the ground that the period of five years had elapsed, the Scheme could not be said to have lapsed under Section 27 of the Act since the possession of the land had been taken and the land had vested in the Government. Even if the petitioner were to obtain a declaration that the scheme had lapsed, it would not enure to the benefit of the petitioner in as much as there cannot be redelivery of the possession of the land to the petitioner on the ground of lapse of the scheme. Since the land had been acquired by the Government for a public purpose and if the said public purpose is not served by a lapsing of the scheme, it was open to the Government to utilize the said land for some other public purpose. As the petitioner did not get any personal benefit or advantage by a declaration that the Scheme had lapsed, the exercise of the extra ordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for grant of such declaration in favour of the petitioner, who had approached the Court after passing of the award was not called for.