RAVINDRA RAMCHANDRA WAGHMARE v. INDORE MUNICIPAL CORPORATION & ORS.

The Judgment of the Court was delivered by ARUN MISHRA, J. 1. Leave granted.

2Copy pinpoint2. The appeals arise out of judgment and order dated 9.5.2016 F passed by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh at Jabalpur and as against order dated 30.9.2010 passed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Madhya Pradesh at Indore thereby affirming the judgment and order passed by the learned Single Judge.

3Copy pinpoint3. The matter arises out of Bhopal Municipal Corporation and G Indore Municipal Corporation. The action taken by the Municipal Corporations of Bhopal and Indore under section 305 of Madhya Pradesh Municipal Corporation Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act of 1956') has been questioned. The Single Bench at Jabalpur had allowed the writ application and held that the land be acquired under the provisions of the Act of2013. Aggrieved thereby, writ appeals were filed by Bhopal H

p. 389 Copy page pinpoint

MUNICIPAL CORPORATION & ORS. [ARUN MISHRA,. J.]

Municipal Corporation which have been allowed by the impugned judgment and order dated 9.5.2016 by a Division Bench of the High Court of M.P.

4Copy pinpoint4. With respect to Bhopal the facts are being narrated from the matter in-between A.K. Pali & Ors. v. State of M.P. & Ors. The State Government through Municipal Corporation, Bhopal as a nodal agency decided to develop Bus Rapid Transit System Corridor (for short 'BRTS corridor') on the stretch of around 8 kms. As per Bhopal Development Plan, 2005 which was notified in the year 1995, the proposed width of the road is 66 mtrs. Initially, the writ petitions were filed by the appellants before a Single Bench in the year 2014 questioning the action initiated by the Municipal Corporation on the ground that such an action was impermissible under the provisions of section 305 of the Act of 1956. At that time the width of the road was 54 mtrs. The appellants' main submission was that they had obtained the permission from the Municipal Corporation so as to raise construction. For acquisition of the land, the provisions contained in the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency D in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act of2013 ')ought to have been resorted to.

5Copy pinpoint5. Under the Jawaharlal Nehru National Urban Renewal Mission, the Central Government had sanctioned the scheme called BRTS corridor for improvement of public transport system at Bhopal in order to avoid hazardous traffic. The Central Sanctioning & Monitoring Committee was constituted by the Ministry of Urban Development which had sanctioned a sum ofRs.357.20 crores for implementation of said scheme. After due sanction by the Committee, NHAI entered into an agreement with Municipal Corporation, Bhopal on 22.9.2009 and handed over particular part ofland to it for the purpose ofBRTS corridor.For betterment of public transport system 225 low floor buses were also sanctioned by Sanctioning and Monitoring Committee of the Central Government. For BRTS corridor survey was undertaken by the Expert Committee of the Central Government namely Urban Mass Transit Council of Bhopal City. G Plan was duly approved by the State Government and the routes were notified as per Plan by the State Transport Authority. Presently only 1.25 lakh passengers are getting the services oflow floor buses. It is not in dispute that most of the BRTS corridor has been constructed and the route from Misrod to Bairagarh is under operation. Buses are plying H

p. 390 Copy page pinpoint

A continuously. The appellants are land-holders in-between Misroad to Ampree Chouraha. The Master Plan was prepared under the provisions ofM.P. Nagar Tatha Gram Nivesh Adhiniyam, 1973 (Town & Country Planning Act) hereinafter referred to as 'the Act of 1973 '. The Development Plan/Master Plan was prepared as per the provisions of section 18 after inviting objections, suggestions. None of the appellants B had raised objection when the development plan was prepared. It was finalized and published as per provisions contained in section 19(4).

6Copy pinpoint6. The development permission was granted by the competent authority under the Act of 1973 as per the provisions contained in section 13(1)(b) and Rule 21(1) framed under the Bhopal Vikas Adhiniyam, c 1984 since repealed with effect from April, 2012. The appellants have raised the construction of their building as perthe conditions mentioned in the map sanctioned by the authority under the Act of 1973. They were required to keep the land for widening of road in question. Accordingly, the landowners submitted their lay-out leaving requisite land from the centre of the road for widening of road. On that basis Municipal Corporation had granted permission to appellants. They were aware of the proposed width of the road.

7Copy pinpoint7. The appellants at the stage of the final hearing of writ appeals before the High Court filed fresh writ petition/amended writ petition for questioning the vires of the provisions contained in sections 305 and 306 of the Act of 1956. It was averred that there is no provision under the Act of 1973 of vesting ofland on publication of Master Plan/Development Plan, particularly the land belonging to private landowners. The acquisition has to be made under the provisions contained in sections 8, 11and16 of the Act of 2013. State Government has no power to reduce quantum of compensation prescribed under the Act of2013. Sections 305 and 306 of the Act of 1956 are unconstitutional as they provide automatic vesting of land without payment of reasonable compensation. The Act of 1956 fails to provide appropriate compensation equivalent to that offered under the Act of 2013. The provisions contained in sections 305 and 306 are violative of Article 14. The provisions contained in sections 305 and 306 have become redundant due to the provisions contained in the Act of

2013. It was submitted that the Corporation is required to acquire the land for widening the streets as per the provisions contained in sections 78 and 79 of the Act of 1956. Thus recourse to section 305 of the Act of 1956 is not permissible for divesting the owner of his right to ownership H

p. 391 Copy page pinpoint

MUNICIPAL CORPORATION & ORS. [ARUN MISHRA, J.]

and that too without payment of compensation. Adoption of onerous and oppressive provision would be illegal and arbitrary. The provision contained in section 305 is more onerous and harsh as compared to the procedure laid down under section 56 of the Act of 1973. It was also submitted that in some of nearby areas the land is being acquired for link road under the Act of 2013 whereas appellants are being discriminated with. Two different processes of acquisition under different Acts cannot be resorted to. It was also submitted that the provision contained in section 306 fails to provide rational, reasonable principle for determination of compensation for deprivation of property of landowner. Right to property is recognized under section 300A and delayed payment of compensation leads to deprivation of property without reasonable process. C Section 306 does not provide as to the time period within which compensation to be paid. Consequently, same is violative of Articles 14, 19 and 300A of the Constitution. It was submitted that the provisions contained in section 306 be read down by incorporating the provisions of the Act of2013 in the light of principles enshrined therein while correlating D it with the provisions of section 387 of the Act of 1956. It was also submitted that within the ken of section 305 of the Act of 1956, Corporation has no right to enter and remove any part of the structure falling within building line.

8Copy pinpoint8. In the cases arising from the Indore Bench vi res of the provisions of sections 305 and 306 of Act of 1956 have not been questioned. In E Indore also BRTS corridor is being undertaken at the cost of Rs.868 crores. Same is being executed through the nodal agency of Indore Development Authority. State Government has granted approval to the project as a Town Development Scheme under section 49(ix) of the Act of 1973. As per appellants BRTS corridor is being undertaken on a portion of Agra Bombay Road (AB Road). It was described as Major City Road in the development plan, 1991 which was prepared and notified in the year 1975. At the relevant time AB Road/MR-I was proposed to be as 40-50 mtrs. At the same time it was provided that for future the width of said road would be 60 to 75 meters. It was in confonnity with the Master Plan of 1991; in the Master Plan of2021 the width of the road is kept 60 meters. On 26.5.2007 a notice was issued for demolition of certain structure for the purpose of widening ofroad. On 1.1.2008 Master "Plan, 2021 had been notified in which AB Road has been proposed as 60 to 75 meters. It was also pointed out that now a separate bye-pass H

p. 392 Copy page pinpoint

A road has been taken out for AB Road. Thus the road in question forms part of the Major City Road that is MR-I, width of which has to be 60 meters. Most of the corridor has been constructed except in some portion of the appellants. Development plan is binding upon the authorities as well as the Corporation. As such, action has been rightly taken under section 305 of the Act of 1956, Se.ctions 305 and 306 provide for B reasonable compensation and when it is not accepted, recourse can be had to the provisions contained in section 387 of the Act of 1956 which provides for determination of compensation by the arbitrators/court on the basis of procedure laid down in the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. As soon as Master Plan/Development Plan is finalized and published there c is restriction upon the owner to raise any construction in contravention of the plan and the Corporation is given the right to remove any structure which is falling within the line of the existing public street or to be constructed in future. The provisions subserve the public interest and widening of the road is necessary for development of rapid transport D system. The procedure prescribed with respect to public street is contained in section 305. Same cannot be said to be illegal or arbitrary in any manner as reasonable compensation is offered which may include FAR in appropriate cases and the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act are also applicable as provided under section 387. Thus the provisions ·cannot be said to be violative of Articles 14, 19, 21 and 300A of the E Constitution oflndia. The action taken falls within the purview of section 305 of the Act of 1956.

9Copy pinpoint9. On behalf of the appellants it was submitted by learned senior counsel that the provisions contained in section 305 of the Act of 1956 are repugnant to the provisions contained in the Act of2013. Compensation F is not offered before taking possession. The provisions contained in section 305 of the Act of 1956 is violative of the protection conferred under Articles 14, I 9, 2 I and 300A of the Constitution and repugnant to the provisions contained in section 56 of the Act of I973. It was also contended that on proper interpretation of the provisions contained in section 305, the Corporation has no right to remove greater portion of G the building or material portion of the projecting part unless it has been taken down or burned down or has fallen down. On notice, it is to be voluntarily removed by the owner thereof. The Corporation can only remove the projecting part which is external to the main building as verandah, step or some other structure. TI1e acquisition proceedings have H

p. 393 Copy page pinpoint

MUNICIPAL CORPORATION & ORS. [ARUN MISHRA, J.)

to be necessarily resorted to under the provisions contained in sections A 78 and 79 of the Act of 1956. Corporation has no right to enter forcibly to remove the structure. It was also submitted that without preparation of a town development scheme as envisaged under section 49 read with section 50 of the Act of 1973, it is not permissible to carry out the provisions contained in the development plan. B l 0. On the other hand it was submitted by learned senior counsel for the respondents that the action taken is in accordance with the development plan which is binding. The provisions under section 305 cannot be said to be ultra vires. The same provide for reasonable compensation. On proper interpretation of section 305 of the Act of 1956 the action of the Corporation is within its ken. It is not necessary C to acquire the land. Corporation has power to remove structure which projects beyond the regular line of public street. The maxims Generalia specialibus non derogant and Generalibus specialia derogant have been pressed into service to contend that if a special provision is made on a certain matter, that matter is excluded from the general provision. D The scheme of the Act of 1973 has been pointed out so as to explain the procedure how regional plan, development plan and town development schemes are prepared. It is not necessary to have recourse to section 56 of the Act of 1973 or sections 78 and 79 of the Act of 1956 for acquisition ofland. E

11Copy pinpoint11. Before dilating upon the rival contentions it is necessary to · take note of the various statutory provisions. In re : Provisions of the Act of 1956 :

12Copy pinpoint12. Section 5(45) of the Act of 1956 defines 'private street'; section 5(49) defines 'public street'; section 5(55) defines 'street'. The provisions F contained in sections 5( 45), 5( 49) and 5(55) are extracted below: "Section 5(45) "private street" means a street which is not a public street; Section 5( 49) "public street" means any street - G (a) Over which the public have a right of way; or (b) Which have been heretofore leveled, paved, metalled, asphalted, channeled, sewered or repaired out of municipal or other public funds; or H

p. 394 Copy page pinpoint

A ( c) Which under the provisions of this Act becomes a public street; And includes - (i) The roadway over any public bridge or causeway; B (ii) The footway attached to any such street; (iii) Public bridge or causeway, and the drains attached to any such street, public bridge or causeway; Section 5(55) "street" means any road, foot-way, square, court alley or passage, accessible, whether permanently or temporarily c to the public, whether a thoroughfare or not; and shall include every vacant space, notwithstanding that it may be private property and partly or wholly obstructed by any gate, post chain or other barrier, if houses, shops or other buildings about thereon, and if it is used by any persons as means of access to or from any public place or thoroughfare, whether such persons be occupiers of such buildings or not; but shall not include any part of such space which the occupier of any such building has a right at all hours to prevent all other persons from using as aforesaid; and shall include also the drains on either side and the land whether covered or not by any pavement, verandah or other erection, which lies on either side of the roadway up to the boundaries of the adjacent property, whether that property be private property or property reserved by Government or by the Corporation for any purpose other than a street;" F Section 330 of the Act of 1956 deals with conversion of streets into public streets. Section 330(1) requires the Commissioner to declare the same to be public streets in exigencies specified therein. Section 330(2) empowers the Commissioner to declare street or part of a street not maintained by Corporation to declare the same to be a public street. G The decision has to be taken after inviting objections and appeal can be preferred against such a decision as provided in section 330(3 ). Section 330 is extracted hereunder: "330. Power to declare streets, when metalled, etc. public streets - ( 1) When any street has been levelled, metalled, tarred H

p. 395 Copy page pinpoint

MUNICIPAL CORPORATION & ORS. [ARUN MISHRA, J.]

or asphalted, paved, inade good, lighted, drained, chanelled and A flagged to the satisfaction of the Commissioner, he shall, if so required by the persons liable for the greater part of the expenditure on such street by notice put up in any part of such street, declare the same to be a public street. The said street shall thereupon become a public street. B (2) The Commissioner may, at any time by a notice exhibited in any street or part of a street not maintained by the Corporation, give intimation of his intention to declare the same a public street, and, unless within one month next after such notice is first exhibited the owner or the majority of owners of such street or such part of street, lodges or lodge objections thereto with the Corporation, C the Commissioner may by a notice exhibited in such street or part, declare the same to be a public street vested in the Corporation. (3) Any person aggrieved by a notice under sub-section (2) may appeal within thirty days from the date of notice is first exhibited, D to the District Court who shall give a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the appellant and the Corporation. (4) The provisions of Parts II and III of the Indian Limitation Act, 1908 relating to appeals shall apply to every appeal preferred under this section." E

13Copy pinpoint13. Section 78 deals with acquisition of immovable property or easement by agreement. Section 79 deals with the procedure when it is not possible to acquire property or easement by agreement. A Corporation has the power under Part V with respect to public health, safety and convenience. Chapter Xlll deals with public convenience, Chapter XIV - conservancy, Chapter XV -sanitary provisions, Chapter XVI - water- F supply, Chapter XVII - general provisions with reference to drainage, water supply and water and other mains, Chapter XVIII with public health and safety, Chapter XIX with markets and slaughter places, Chapter XX - food, drink, drug and dangerous articles, Chapter XXI - restraint of infection; Chapter XXII-disposal of the dead. Part VI relates G to lands, buildings and streets. Chapter XXlll deals with town planning. Section 291 mandates for town planning scheme. Section 292 contains the restriction on Corporation's power to undertake town planning scheme when any scheme under the Town Improvement Act has been formed for the area in question. Colonisation is dealt with in Chapter XXIII-A. H

p. 396 Copy page pinpoint

A Chapter XXN deals with building control under the provisions of section

293. There is restriction on construction without permission. Under section 295 Commissioner has the power to refuse erection or re-erection of buildings. Section 296 contains the provision as to grounds on which site of proposed building may be disapproved. Section 297 deals with the grounds on which permission to erect or re-erect building may be refused. B Section 299 confers the power upon the Commissioner to direct modification of a sanctioned plan of a building before its completion. Under section 299A State Government has the power to cancel or revise permission for construction of a building. Section 300 mandates for lapse of sanction after one year from the date of such sanction. Section 302 c confers power upon the Commissioner to stop construction unlawfully commenced. Section 303 confers power upon the Commissioner to direct removal of person from a building in which works are urilawfully carried on or which are unlawfully occupied. Erection and use of temporary building is to be approved by Commissioner as provided under section

D 304. Under Section 305, Corporation has the power to regulate line of buildings. Section 306 deals with compensation to be paid. With respect to dangerous and insanitary buildings, the Corporation has the power from sections 309 to 316. With respect to public streets, Corporation has the power under Chapter XXVI contained in sections 317 to 331. Section 322 prohibits all obstruction in streets. Section 323 ensures streets not to E be opened or broken up. Section 318 provides for prohibition of projection upon streets. It is apparent that ample and widest power has been conferred under the Act of 1956 upon the local authorities in such matters in public interest. In re : Provisions of the Act of 1973 :

14Copy pinpoint14. Provisions contained in the Act of 1973 are also required to be taki;:n note of along with the provisions contained in the Town Improvement Act which has a reference in the Act of 1956 in section 292 thereof. Under the Act of 1973, section 2(g) defines development plan G includes a zoning plan. It defines 'local authority' to mean a Municipal Corporation constituted by the Act of 1956, Municipal Council or Nagar Panchayat constituted by or under the M.P. Municipalities Act, 1961 etc. Planning area, regional plan, town development scheme and zone have been defined in section 2(o), 2{q), 2(u) and 2(w) of Act of 1973 H respectively. Same are extracted hereunder :

p. 397 Copy page pinpoint

MUNICIPAL CORPORATION & ORS. [ARUN MISHRA, J.]

"Section 2(0) "planning area" means any area declared to be A a planning area under this Act and [non-planning area shall be construed accordingly]; Section 2(g) "regional plan" means a plan for the region prepared under this Act, and approved by the State Government; Section 2(u) "town development scheme" means a scheme prepared for the implementation of the provisions of a development plan by the Town and Country Development Authority and includes "scheme"; Section 2(w) "zone" means any section of a planning area for which, under the development plan, a detailed zoning plan is prepared;"

15Copy pinpoint15. Regional planning is dealt with in Chapter III. State Government has the power to declare any area in the State to be a region for the purposes of the Act. Director is empowered to prepare regional plan under section 5. Section 7 provides for contents thereof. Section 8 D provides for preparation of the same. Under section 8, objections and suggestions are invited then Director has to consider them as per section · 8(2), afford a reasonable opportunity to all the persons affected thereby of being heard then the State Government may finalise the regional plan with or without modifications. Proviso to sub-section (2) of section 9 E mandates that in case the State Government modifies the draft regional plan in that case State Government has to publish the same in the Gazette, invite objections and suggestions on the modifications proposed and after giving reasonable opportunity of being heard, has to finalise it. Section 10 of the Act of 1973 provides that as soon as draft plan is published, no person, authority or department of the Government or any other person shall change the use of land for any purpose other than agriculture or carry out any development in respect of any land contrary to the provisions of the draft plan, without the prior approval of the Director or an officer not below the rank of a Deputy Director. Section 10(3) provides that in case any work is carried out in contravention of the provisions of the section, the Corporation or other local authority or the Collector in areas outside such local areas of the authority may cause such work to be removed or demolished at the cost of the defaulter which shall be recovered from him as an arrear ofland revenue. Removal or demolition is contemplated after notice and hearing. Section 11 of the Act of 1973 H

p. 398 Copy page pinpoint

A deals with exclusion from claims of compensation in certain cases. If compensation in respect of such demolition has already been paid under any other law, the owner shall not be entitled to any compensation by reason of the restrictions under the Act.

16Copy pinpoint16. Chapter IV of the Act of 1973 deals with the planning areas B and fresh development plan. As per section 13 thereof, State Government has to issue a notification for constituting planning areas and it can alter, amalgamate or divide the area. Section 13(3) provides that once notification under section 13( 1) of the Act of 1973 has been issued a Corporation under the Act of 1956 and other local authorities, as the case may be under the respective Acts ceases to exercise the powers, perform the c functions and discharge duties which the State Government or the Director is competent to exercise, perform and discharge under the Act. Section 13 is extracted hereunder : "Section 13. Planning area. - (I) The State Government may, by notification, constitute planning areas for the purposes of this Act and define the limits thereof. (2) The State Government may, by notification, (a) alter the limits of the planning area so as to include therein or exclude therefrom such area as may be specified in the notification; (b) amalgamate two or more planning areas so as to constitute one planning area; (c) divide any planning area into two or more planning areas; (d) declare that the whole or part of the area constituting the planning area shall cease to be a planning area or part thereof. (3) Notwithstanding anything contained in the Madhya Pradesh Municipal Corporation Act, 1956 (No. 23 of 1956), the Madhya Pradesh Municipalities Act, 1961(No.37of1961) or the Madhya Pradesh Panchayat Raj Adhiniyam, 1993 (No.I of 1994), the G Municipal Corporation, Municipal Council or the Nagar Panchayat or a Panchayat, as the case may be, shall, in relation to the planning areas, from the date of the notification issued under sub-section (I), cease to exercise the powers, perform the functions and discharge the duties which the State Government or the Director H

p. 399 Copy page pinpoint

MUNICIPAL CORPORATION & ORS. [ARUN MISHRA, J.]

is competent to exercise, perform and discharge under this Act." A

17Copy pinpoint17. Section 14 deals with preparation of development plan. Section 15 deals with the preparation of existing land use maps and once the existing land use map has been published under section 15, section 16 puts restriction upon the user of the land for any purpose other than that indicated without permission in writing of the Director and no local B authority notwithstanding anything contained in any other law, has the power to grant permission for change in the use of land otherwise than as indicated in the existing land use map without the permission in writing of the Director.

18Copy pinpoint18. Section 17 deals with the contents of the development plan. c Section 18 deals with the publication of draft development plan prepared under section 14 and objections thereto and suggestions in writing have to be invited within 30 days then the Committee under section 17A(l) has to consider the objections and suggestions and after giving reasonable opportunity to all persons affected thereby, of being heard, suggest such modifications in the draft development plan as it may consider necessary D then it has to be submitted to the Director who in turn, within 30 days has to submit the same to the State Government. Section 19 deals with the sanction of the development plan. State Government under section 19( 1) may either approve the development plan or may approve it with such modifications as it may consider necessary or may return it to the E Director to modify the same in accordance with such directions as may be deemed appropriate. In case the State Government wants to notify the development plan with modifications, objections and suggestions thereto have to be invited afresh within 30 days from the date of publication of notice in writing as mandated by section 19(2) and after giving hearing to the persons and considering objections and suggestions F the State Government may confirm the modification in the development plan as provided in section 19(3). As per section 19(4) development plan has to be published in the Gazette. As per section 19(5), development plan shall come into operation from the date of publication of the notice in the Gazette and as from such date shall be binding on all Development G Authorities and local authorities functioning in the planning area. Sections 18 and 19 are extracted hereunder : "18. Publication of draft development plan. - ( 1) The Director shall publish the draft development plan prepared under Section 14 in such manner as may be prescribed together with a notice of H

p. 400 Copy page pinpoint

A the preparation of the draft development plan and the place or the places where the copies may be inspected, inviting objections and suggestions in writing from any person with respect thereto, within thirty days from the date of communication of such notice, such notice shall specify in regard to the draft development plan, the following particulars, namely, B (i) the existing land use maps; (i-a) the natural hazard prone areas with the description ofnatural hazards; (ii) a narrative report, supported by maps and charts, explaining c the provisions of the draft development plan; (iii) the phasing of implementation of the draft development plan as suggested by the Director; (iv) the provisions for enforcing the draft development plan and stating the manner in which permission for development may be obtained; D (v) approximate cost of land acquisition for public purposes and the cost of works involved in the implementation of the plan. (2) The committee constituted under sub-section (I) of Section 17-A shall not later than ninety days after the publication of the notice under sub-section (I), consider all the objections and suggestions as may be received within the period specified in the notice under sub-section (I) and shall, after giving reasonable opportunity to all persons affected thereby of being heard, suggest such modifications in the draft development plan as it may consider necessary, and submit, not later than six months after the publication of the draft development plan, the plan as so modified, to the Director together with all connected documents plans, maps and charts. (3) The Director shall, within 30 days of the receipt of the plan and other documents from the committee submit all the documents and plans so received alongwith his comments, to the State Government.

19Copy pinpoint19. Sanction of development plans.- (I) As soon as may be after the submission of the development plan under Section 18 the State Government may either approve the development plan H

p. 401 Copy page pinpoint

MUNICIPAL CORPORATION & ORS. [ARUN MISHRA, J.]

or may approve, it with such modifications as it may consider necessary or may return it to the Director to modify the same or to prepare a fresh plan in accordance with such directions as the State Government may deem appropriate. (2) Where the State Government approves the development plan with modifications, the State Government shall, by a notice published in the Gazette, invite objections and suggestions in respect of such modifications within a period of not less than thirty days from the date of publication of the notice in the Gazette. (3) After considering objections and suggestions and after giving a hearing to the persons desirous of being heard, the State c Government may confirm the modification in the development plan. (4)The State Government shall publish a public notice in the Gazette and in such other manner as may be prescribed of the approval of the development plan approved under the foregoing provisions D and the place or places where the copies of the approved development plan may be inspected. (5) The development plan shall come into operation from the date of publication of the said notice in the Gazette under sub-section (4) and as from such date shall be binding 011 all E Development Authorities constituted under this Act and all local authorities functioning with the planning area." (emphasis added)

19. Section 25 of the Act of 1973 lays down that once Development Plan comes into force the use and development of land shall conform to the provisions of the development plan. It was also provided in section 25(2) that diversion of land shall be subjectto the provisions of the Act of 1973. Section 25 is extracted below:· "25. Conformity with development plan -( 1) After the coming into force of the development plan, the use and development of land shall conform to the provisio11s of the development plan: Provided that the Director may, at its discretion, permit the continued use ofland for the purpose for which it was being used H

p. 402 Copy page pinpoint

A at the time of the coming into operation of the development plan: Provided further that such permission shall not be granted for a period exceeding seven years from the date of coming into operation of the development plan. (2) Notwithstanding anything contained in Section 172 of the B Madhya Pradesh Land Revenue Code, 1959 (No.20of1959) every permission to divert land granted under that section shall be subject to the provisions of this Act." (emphasis added)

20Copy pinpoint20. It is apparent that the development plan once prepared is binding c upon the development authorities in the planning area as well as on the Municipal Corporation and other local authorities as the case may be. They cannot modify and permit the user in contravention thereof. In other words, restriction is imposed upon the owners on enjoyment of the property in violation of the development plan/regional plan, as the case may be.

21Copy pinpoint21. Section 49 oftheActofl 973 deals with the town development schemes. Same has to be prepared under the umbrella of the regional plan and development plan. The town development scheme is prepared by the Town & Country Development Authority established under the provisions of section 38. The same shall be a body corporate under the provisions of section 39 and its constitution is provided in section 40. Section 49 of the Act of 1973 is extracted hereunder: "49. Town Development Schemes.- A town development scheme may make provision for any of the following matters, F (i) acquisition, development and sale or leasing of land for the purpose of town expansion; (ii) acquisition, relaying out of, rebuilding, or relocating areas which have been badly laid out or which has developed or degenerated into a slum; G (iii) acquisition and development ofland for public purposes such as housing development, development of shopping centers, cultural centers, administrative centers; (iv) acquisition and development of areas for commercial and industrial purposes; H

p. 403 Copy page pinpoint

MUNICIPAL CORPORATION & ORS. [ARUN MISHRA, J.]

(v) undertaking of such building or construction work as may be necessary to provide housing, shopping, commercial or other facilities; (vi) acquisition of land and its development for the purpose of laying out or remodeling of road and street patterns; (vii) acquisition and development ofland for playgrounds, parks, recreation centres and stadium; (viii) reconstruction of plots for the purpose of buildings, roads, drains, sewage lines and other similar amenities; (ix) any other work of a nature such as would bring about environmental improvements which may be taken up by the authority with the prior approval of the State Government."

22Copy pinpoint22. Section 50 of the Act of 1973 provides for method of preparation of town development schemes. The town development scheme may deal with the town expansion, badly laid out areas or slums, acquisition and development of land for housing, shopping centres, cultural centres, administrative centres, commercial and industrial purposes, remodelling of road and street patterns, reconstruction of lands for building roads, drains etc. Under section 50 draft plan has to be published, objections have to be invited, heard and decided. Thereafter scheme is finalized, same has to be published in the Gazette. Section 55 prov~des that the land needed for town development scheme shall be deemed to be a land required for public purpose within the meaning of Land Acquisition Act. Section 56 deals with acquisition of land for Town and Country Development Authority. Within 3 years of preparation of town development scheme under section 50, the authority may acquire the land by agreement and in case that is not possible the State Government at the request of the authority may proceed to acquire the land under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act. The town development scheme has to be executed by the authority within 3 years by acquiring the land in case it is necessary as per the provisions contained in section 56.

23Copy pinpoint23. It is apparent from the provisions contained in the Act of 1973 the three different provisions for preparation ofregional plan, development plan (master plan) and town development scheme. The regional plan is prepared by the State Government. Development plan is prepared as H

p. 404 Copy page pinpoint

A per the provisions contained in Chapter IV, sections 13 to 19 and once development plan has been finalized, it is binding on development authorities as well as the Municipal Corporation, Municipal Council and other local authorities functioning in the planning area. Town development scheme can be framed by the development authorities a11d it may declare its intention to do so with the prior approval of the State Government. B In re : Town Planning Scheme of the Act of 1956 :

24Copy pinpoint24. Section 291 of the Act of 1956 enjoins upon the Municipal Corporation to prepare town planning scheme and in case the scheme has been sanctioned under the provisions of Town Improvement Act, it c is provided by section 292 of the Act of 1956 that no town planning scheme shall be made by the Corporation. Sections 291 and 292 of the Act of 1956 are extracted hereunder : "291. Town planning scheme.- (I) The Corporation may, and if so required by the Government shall, within six months of the date of such requisition, direct the Commissioner to draw up a town planning scheme, which may, among other things, provide for the following matter, namely:- (a) a direction that in any street, portion of a street or locality specified in the scheme the elevation and construction of the frontage of all buildings thereafter erected or re-erected shall, in respect of their architectural features, be such as may be fixed for the locality; (b) a direction that in any street, portion of a street or locality specified in the scheme, there shall be allowed the construction only detached or semi-detached buildings or both, and that the land appurtenant to each building shall be of an area not less than that specified in the scheme; (c) a direction that in any street, portion of a street or locality specified in the scheme, the construction of more than a specified number of houses on each acre of land shall not be allowed; G (d) a direction that in any street, portion of a street or locality specified in the scheme, the construction of shops, warehouses, factories, huts or buildings of a specified architectural character or buildings designed for particular purpose shall not be allowed; H

p. 405 Copy page pinpoint

MUNICIPAL CORPORATION & ORS. [ARUN MISHRA, J.]

(e) a street line and a building line on either side or on both sides of any street existing or proposed; (f) a standard plan, either for the division of land into building sites, or forthe location of buildings within a building site; (g) the amount ofland which shall be transferred to the Corporation for public purposes and public streets by owners ofland on payment of compensation; (h) the prohibition of building operations permanently or temporarily when by reason of the situation or nature of the land, the erection ofbuildings thereon would be likely to involve danger or injury to health, or excessive expenditure of public money in the provision of roads, sewers, water supply or other public services; (i) regulating in the interest of safety, the height and position of proposed walls, fences or hedges near the comers or bends of streets; D U) limiting the number or prescribing the sites of new roads entering a highway maintained by the Government; (k) regulating, in respect of the erection of any building intended to be used for purposes of business or industry, the provision of accommodation for loading, unloading or fuelling vehicles with a E view to the prevention of obstruction of traffic on any highway; and (I) a direction that in any street, portion of a street or locality specified in the scheme, the use of land for any purposes even though not involving the erection ofbuilding, shall not be inconsistent with the provisions of this section with respect ofbuildings. F

(2) When a scheme has been drawn up under the provisions of sub-section (1), the Commissioner shall give public notice of the scheme and shall therein announce a date not less than 30 days from the date of such notice by which any person may submit to the Commissioner in writing any objection or suggestion with regard G to the scheme which he may wish to make. (3) The Commissioner shall within fifteen days of the date announced under the provisions of sub-section (2), forward to the Mayor-in-Council the notice together with the objections or H

p. 406 Copy page pinpoint

A suggestions, if any, and his opinion therefor. (4) The Mayor-in-Council, shall within fifteen days of the receipt of the documents relating to the scheme, forward them to the Corporation together with the opinion of the Commissioner and any comments which the Mayor-in-Council may make. B (5) The Corporation shall consider every objection or suggestion with regard to the scheme and may modify the scheme in consequence of any such objection or suggestion and shall then forward such scheme as originally drawn up or as modified, together with the documents mentioned in sub-section (4) to the c Government which may sanction the scheme or sanction it with such modification as it may think fit or may refuse to sanction it, or may return it to the Corporation for reconsideration and re- submission by a specified date. (6) If the Corporation fails to submit a scheme within six months of being required to do so under sub-section (I) or fails to re- submit a scheme by a specified date when required to do so under sub-section ( 5), or re-submits a scheme which is not approved by the Government, the Government may draw up a scheme which shall be published within the limits of the Corporation together with an intimation of the date by which any person may submit in writing to the Government any objection or suggestion which he may wish to make. The Government may sanction such scheme as originally published or modified in consequence of any such objection or suggestion as the Government may think fit. (7) Notwithstanding anything contained in the foregoing sub- F sections if the Corporation in case of scheme initiated by it, decides to drop the scheme it shall intimate the Government accordingly. (8) The cost of such scheme, or such portion of the cost as the Government may deem fit shall be paid from the Municipal Fund. (9) When sanctioning a scheme the Government may impose the G conditions for the submission of periodical reports on the progress of the scheme to the Government, and for the inspection and supervision of the scheme by the Government. (I 0) No person shall erect or re-erect any building or take any other action in contravention of any such scheme or of any rule or bye law made under the provisions of this Act. H

p. 407 Copy page pinpoint

MUNICIPAL CORPORATION & ORS. [ARUN MISHRA, J.]

292. Restriction on Corporation's power to undertake town A planning scheme - Notwithstanding anything contained in section 291, no town planning scheme shall be made by the Corporation for any area for which a scheme has been sanctioned under the provisions of Town Improvement Act." (emphasis added) B It is apparent that section 292 of the Act of 1956 refers to Town lmprovement Act which was in vogue in different areas of erstwhile Madhya Pradesh which has ultimately consolidated the different Acts into the M.P. Town Improvement Trust Act, 1960 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act of 1960'). c

25Copy pinpoint25. The Act of 1960 provided for various improvement schemes under section 30. Section 31 of the Act of 1960 dealt with types of improvement schemes such as general improvement schemes, re- building, re-housing, street, deferred street schemes and development scheme. I 0 types of schemes were provided under section 31 . When D scheme was proposed, consideration of representation was also provided. The State Government had the power to sanction, reject or return the improvement scheme as provided in section 51. Jn case the State Government sanctioned the scheme it was required to be notified under section 52 of the Act of 1960. The Act of 1960 has ceased to be operative in the areas, once the Act of 1973 has been made applicable by establishing E the authorities under the provisions of sections 38 to 40. In our considered view, the expression 'scheme' in section 292 has to be taken to mean the regional plan, development plan and also to any scheme under section 49 framed under the Act of 1973. The provision is not confined to a scheme prepared under ,sections 49 and 50 of the Act of 1973. There cannot be two schemes for the same area. F

In re : Scope of power of Corporation under Section 305 :

26Copy pinpoint26. Before takingthe question ofvires of the provisions contained in sections 305 and 306 of the Act of 1956, we consider it appropriate to deal with the submissions raised on behalf of the appellants with respect G to its interpretation and ken of powers conferred upon the Municipal Corporation. Section 305 of the Act of 1956 is extracted hereunder: "305. Power to regulate line of buildings.- (I) If any part of a building projects beyond the regular line of a public street, either as existing or as determined for the future or beyond the H

p. 408 Copy page pinpoint

A front of immediately adjoining buildings the Corporation may- (a) ifthe projecting part is a verandah, step or some other structure external to the main building, then at any time, or (b) ifthe projecting part is not such external structure as aforesaid, then whenever the greater portion of such building or whenever B any material portion of such projecting part has been taken down or burned down or has fallen down, require by notice either that the part of some portion of the part projecting beyond the regular line or beyond the front of the immediate adjoining building, shall be removed, or that such building c when being rebuilt shall be set back to or towards the said line or front; and the portion of land added to the street by such setting back or removal shall henceforth be deemed to be part of the public street and shall vest in the Corporation: Provided that the Corporation shall make reasonable compensation to the owner for any damage or loss he may sustain in consequence of his building or any part thereof being set back. (2) The Corporation may, on such terms as it thinks fit, allow any building to be set forward for the improvement of the line of the street."

27Copy pinpoint27. It was submitted on behalf of the appellants that for the exigencies contemplated in clause (a) of sub-section (I) of section 305 when projecting part is external to the main building then notice can be issued at any time for removal of projecting part such as verandah, step or some other structure and in case projecting pa11 is as provided in section 305(1 )(b) whenever projecting part is greater portion of such building or whenever any material portion of such projecting part has been taken down or burned down or has fallen down then only notice can be issued. No notice can be issued by the Corporation under the provisions of section 305( I) for its removal. The word 'or' in clause (b) in-between greater portion of such building and material portion is not disjunctive. First part of clause (b) has to be read conjunctively with the latter part. Even if greater portion of such building and material portion of such projecting part is read disjunctively, the words used taken down, burned down, fallen down qualify both the exigencies provided in clause (b). The word 'removal' used in section 305(1) has to be read for the situation in clause (a) only. For the situation covered by clause (b) notice H

p. 409 Copy page pinpoint

MUNICIPAL CORPORATION & ORS. [ARUN MISHRA, J.]

is issued only after happening of the mentioned event and that at the same time, when building is proposed to be re-built, notice can be for "setting back" of the building. It was also submitted that in a given situation when greater or material portion of the building or projecting part has fallen down but some portion of the building which is still projecting beyond the building line, in that situation Corporation can legitimately ask the owner to remove the remaining projecting portion of the building. It was also submitted that the latter part of section 305 empowers the Corporation to issue a notice and require the owner to act in the manner stated to remove or set back while re-building. The section does not empower the Corporation to enter and take possession. Thus, Corporation has no power to remove; enter or take possession of greater portion or material portion of the building. It was also submitted that vesting takes place only after portion of the land is added to the public street by setting back or removal. Till that exigency happens, property continues to be that of the owner. Section 305 contemplates voluntary action on the part of owner. There is conscious omission as to the power of the Corporation D to remove or enter which cannot be supplied by the Court. Municipal Authorities have to act within the confine of the powers conferred upon them. They cannot commit trespass. Thus without acquisition of the land under section 278 or 279, as the case may be, of the Act of 1956 on the refusal of the owner to remove, Corporation has no right to have the land and remove the structure. Under the guise of Section 305, E Corporation cannot invoke the power of acquisition ofland.

28Copy pinpoint28. On behalf of the respondents, it was submitted that the provision contained in section 305 authorises the Corporation to remove any part of the building. If any part of building projects beyond the regular line of building, existing or as determined for the future or beyond the front of immediately adjoining buildings, that part or some portion of the part projecting beyond the regular line or beyond the front of the adjoining building shall be removed. The action taken is in accordance with the law hence no interference is called for.

29Copy pinpoint29. In our considered opinion, it is clear that Section 305 deals with the power of Corporation to regulate line of buildings. If any part of the building falls within the regular line ofa public street either existing or as determined for the future or beyond the front of immediately adjoining building, the Corporation may issue a notice either that part which is projecting or some portion of the pait projecting, shall be removed H

p. 410 Copy page pinpoint

A or that when the building is rebuilt, the portion projecting shall be set back to and the portion of the land added to the street by such "setting back or removal", shall henceforth be deemed to be part of the public street and shall vest in the Corporation. The words 'that the part or some portion of the part projecting beyond the regular line' of the public street may be : B (a) greater portion of such building which has not fallen down; or (b) that projecting part is verandah, step or some other structure external to the main building; or ( c) whenever any material portion or such material part has been taken c down, burned down or has fallen down. All the abovesaid exigencies are covered in the ken of section 305(1 ). Section 305 only contemplates issuance of a notice, in the case of a public street that the part projecting is beyond the regular line of public street and is greater portion or material portion of such building or D external portion to the main building, shall be removed. It has to intimate its intention to remove the structure. In case any portion of such material part has been taken down, burned down or has fallen down, the Corporation may require by notice such portion shall be set back to.

30Copy pinpoint30. We are not at all impressed by the submission that section 305 E contemplates only voluntary removal by the ownerofthe building. Section 305 is a wholesome provision with respect to maintaining the regular line of a pub Iic street, existing or as determined for the future, it clearly empowers the Corporation to intimate its intention to remove that part of the structure projecting beyond the regular line of public street under section 305. The primary statutory mandate is on Corporation to act for removal. Obviously, it has power to remove is apparent from plain language otherwise the provision will be ofno utility. The point when the notice can be issued is clearly culled out in section 305. In the case of clause (a) when the projecting part is external to the main building such as verandah, step etc. then notice can be issued at any time and two points of happening of exigencies are provided separately in clause (b ): first, whenever projecting part is not an external structure but is a greater portion of such building and it projects beyond the regular line of public street and second exigency provided in clause (b) has to be read as "whenever any material potiion of such projecting part has been taken down or burned down or has fallen down". H

p. 411 Copy page pinpoint

MUNICIPAL CORPORATION & ORS. [ARUN MISHRA, J.)

31Copy pinpoint31. Even in clause (b) of section 305, 'removal' is contemplated and is not confined to a case under clause (a). The Legislature has used two expressions : "whenever greater portion of such building" and secondly "whenever any material portion of projecting part has been taken down or burned down or has fallen down", which means that clause (b) clearly fixes the time for action that 'whenever' projecting part of greater portion of such building is projecting beyond the regular line of public street, removal can be made or 'whenever' material portion of such projecting part has been taken down, burned down or fallen down, it has to be set back and part which has not fallen down, has to be removed. The removal is contemplated even in the latter exigency of clause (b) when material portion of such part has been taken down, c bumed down or fallen down, still some portion other than 'material portion' projecting in line may require removal which has not been taken down, fallen down or burned down. It is not that the expression that entire building projecting in regular line of public street has been taken down, burned down or fallen down. The expression in the latter part of clause D (b) is taken down, fallen down or burned down is not related to the entire projecting part. Thus the earlier part "whenever greater portion of such building" is projecting beyond the regular line of public street, has to be read with respect to a building which has not fallen down, taken down or burned down. The word 'or' in section 305( 1)(b) used between greater portion of such building or whenever any material portion of E such building has to be read disjunctively. Nonetheless 'removal' is contemplated in all the exigencies. In case it has been taken down, burned down or fallen down, it may require the material portion to be set back and remaining portion can be removed in the latter exigency of clause (b) itself. F

32Copy pinpoint32. In our opinion, a notice can be issued by the Corporation for removal of the existing structure also. The opening part of section 305( I) and its latter part after clause (b) make it abundantly clear that a building or a part of the portion which projects into the periphery of regular line of public street, can be removed. The interpretation suggested on behalf of the appellants that in case the building has been taken down, burned G down or fallen down, only in that exigency action can be taken under section 305(b) and not otherwise, would render the provision contained in section 305 and the provision as to public street in the development plan otiose. H

p. 412 Copy page pinpoint

33Copy pinpoint33. Learned counsel for the appellant/s has placed reliance on the provisions contained in sections 307(3), 309(2), 309(5), 309(6), 310 and 313 so as to contend that statutory power has been conferred under those provisions and Commissioner has been statutorily authorized on the failure of the owner to remove the construction after notice to remove the same. Therefore, it was submitted that accordingly the provisions of B section 305 should be construed by us so as to negate the power of removal with the Corporation.

34Copy pinpoint34. In our opinion, the provision contained in section 307 is totally different. Where an adjudicatory process is involved, person can show sufficient cause why the bui Iding or work shall not be removed, altered c or pulled down but in the cases falling within the purview of section 305, there is no such adjudicatory process or discretion provided. The expression used in section 307(2) is that show-cause has to be made why the work shall not be removed, altered or pulled down, and a person is required to show-cause and on his own failure to show "sufficient cause" why such building or work should not be removed, Commissioner is authorized to remove, alter or pull down the building or work under section 307(3). Since the notice which is contemplated under section 305 does not involve such a case showing sufficiency of cause in case building is falling within the regular line of public street, the building is necessarily to be removed. The expression used is that require by notice removal of the building, the legislative mandate for removal is addressed to the Corporation also to remove the same. As such it was not necessary to repeat it once over again in the provisions contained in section 305.

35Copy pinpoint35. Section 309 deals with the provisions regarding building unfit for human habitation. In that eventuality certain procedure is specified. F We find absolutely no ground to accept the submission that the procedure prescribed under section 309 or the provisions thereof should guide the interpretation of section 305 and for similar reason the provisions contained in sections 310 and 313 relating to dangerous building and removal of building material from any places in certain cases which may G be considered harming or breeding places for riot or other source of danger or nuisance to the occupier, then a notice shall be required to be issued; and on failure the Commissioner is empowered to remove; whereas the provisions of section 305 cast a mandate upon the Corporation to remove whatever is projecting beyond the regular line of public street. The intendment of the aforesaid provisions is different, H

p. 413 Copy page pinpoint

MUNICIPAL CORPORATION & ORS. [ARUN MISHRA, J.]

hence render no help or guide so as to interpret the provisions of section A

305. In fact when all the provisions are considered, the interpretation of section 305 is fortified that it primarily mandates the Corporation to take action of removal on satisfaction of exigencies specified therein. In re : Possession/deemed to be part of public street and vesting under section 305 of the Act of 1956: B

36Copy pinpoint36. Coming to question as to when vesting takes place. As soon as the building or the projecting part has been removed or when the Corporation has issued a notice when such re-building shall be set back or to the front line, the line added by such action by setting back or removal, shall henceforth without any further formalities, be deemed to c be a part of public street and shall vest in the Corporation. Vesting does not depend upon the volition of the owner. Otherwise no public street can ever be brought in regular line. The Corporation has the power to remove, as discussed hereinabove. As deemed vesting is provided under Section 305, as such there is no requirement of separate provision for taking possession. For removal there is specific provision and adequate D ,, safeguards have been provided for fixing the regular line of a public street while preparing the development plan or the town development scheme, as the case may be.

37Copy pinpoint37. In The Municipal Corporation, Indore v. K.N. Palsikar AIR 1969 SC 579, a question arose whether it was open to the Corporation E to withdraw from the acquisition. This Court has laid down that there is automatic vesting of land in the Corporation under section 305 once the requisite conditions are satisfied. This Court has observed as under: "14. Regarding point No. I, we agree with the High Court that there is no provision in the Act for enabling the Corporation to F withdraw from the acquisition proceedings. In fact, it seems to us that there is automatic vesting ofthe land in the Corporation under Sec. 305 once the requisite conditions are satisfied. " (emphasis supplied) G As to the third question framed by this Court in Palsikar's case (supra) to the effect that when the Act provides only for compensation and not any solatium whether it could be paid. This Court laid down that once the Land Acquisition Act is applicable under section 387 solatium can be claimed. H

p. 414 Copy page pinpoint

38Copy pinpoint38. It was also submitted that possession can be taken only after compensation has been paid as held in State of Uttar Pradesh v. Hari Ram (2013) 4 SCC 280. It was submitted that there is a difference between de jure possession and de facto possession. It was also submitted that mere vesting in the absence of specific substantive provision providing for taking over of possession forcibly, does not authorize any B authority to take over the physical possession of any property. The decision in State of U.P. v. Hari Ram (supra) is quite distinguishable and is based upon the provisions contained in section 10 of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 (in short, "the Act of 1976"). Section I 0(5) whereof provides after the land has vested to take c possession by a notice. On failure to comply with the notice to hand- over possession Competent Authority may take possession under section 10(6) of the Act of 1976. Legal fiction of vesting has been taken into consideration and discussed by this Court in the said decision. This Court has laid down that while the meaning of the legal fiction has to be D ascertained for what purpose it is created and should be carried as far as necessary to achieve the legislative purpose, the word 'vest' in a statute has different meaning in different contexts. This Court has also held that "vest/vested" therefore may or may not include transfer of possession, the meaning of which depends on the context in which it has been used and the interpretation of various other related provisions. This E Court in Hari Ram (supra) has discussed the meaning of such legal fiction thus : "18. The legislature is competent to create a legal fiction, for the purpose of assuming existence of a fact which does not really exist. Sub-section (3) of Section I 0 contained two deeming provisions such as "deemed to have been acquired" and "deemed to have been vested absolutely". Let us first examine the legal consequences of a "deeming provision". In interpreting the provision creating a legal fiction, the court is to ascertain for what purpose the fiction is created and after ascertaining this, the court is to assume all those facts and consequences which are incidental or inevitable corollaries to the giving effect to the fiction. This Court in Delhi Cloth and General Mills Co. Ltd. v. State of Rajasthan ( 1996) 2 SCC 449 held that what can be deemed to exist under a legal fiction are facts and not legal consequences which do not flow from the law as it stands. H

-__,..' RAVINDAA RAMCHANDRA WAGHMARE v. INDORE 415 "'-'...._ _MUNICIPAL CORPORATION & ORS. [ARUN MISHRA, J.]

19. James, L.J. in Levy, In re, exp Walton (1881) 17 Ch D 746 A speaks on deeming fiction as: (Ch D p. 756) "... When a statute enacts that something shall be deemed to have been done, which in fact and [in] truth was not done, the court is entitled and bound to ascertain for what purposes and between what persons the statutory fiction is to be resorted to." B

24. The expression "deemed to have been acquired" used as a deeming fiction under sub-section (3) of Section 10 can only mean acquisition of title or acquisition of interests because till that time the land may be either in the ownership of the person who held that vacant land or to possess such land as owner or as a tenant ·c or as mortgagee and so on as defined under Section 2( 1) of the Act. The word "vested" has not been defined in the Act, so also the word "absolutely". What is vested absolutely is only the land which is deemed to have acquired and nothing more. The word "vest" has different meaning in different context; especially when we examine the meaning of "vesting" on the basis of a statutory hypothesis of a deeming provision which Lord Hoffmann in Customs and Excise Commissioners v. Zielinski Baker and Partners Ltd. (2004) 2 All ER 141 (HL) at para 11 described as "heroic piece of deeming".

28. "Vest"/"vested", therefore, may or may not include "transfer of possession", the meaning of which depends on the context in which it has been placed and the interpretation of various other related provisions." Though in the context of section 10 of the Urban Ceiling Act and provision of taking possession, this Court in Hari Ram (supra) has laid down that "vesting" under section l 0 takes in every interest in the property including de jure possession and not de facto but it is always open to a person to voluntarily surrender and give possession under section l 0(3) of the Act, which is not the position in the instant case as held by us in removal of the building under section 305 of the Act of 1956, it is implicit that once removal is made, vesting follows and possession stands transferred as part of public street. When we consider the deeming fiction in section 305 and vesting provision, de Jure and de facto possession automatically vested in the Corporation on the happening of the exigencies as provided in section 305.

416 SUPREME COURT REPORTS -[~0~.6] 9 S.C.&:-. ·

39Copy pinpoint39. It was submitted on behalf of appellants that there is a conscious omission in the provision contained in section 305 with respect to the power of entry, removal or to take possession. The appel Ian ts have relied upon the decision of this Court in The Commissioner of Sales Tax, U.P. Lucknow v. Mis. Parson Tools & Plants, Kanpur ( 1975) 4 SCC 22, thus : B "16. If the legislature wilfully omits to incorporate something of an analogous law in a subsequent statute, or even if there is a casus omissus in a statute, the language of which is otherwise plain and unambiguous, the Court is not competent to supply the omission by engrafting on it or introducing in it, under the guise of c interpretation, by analogy or implication, something what it thinks to be a general principle ofjustice and equity. To do so "would be entrenching upon the preserves of Legislature'', the primary function of a court of law being ;us dicere and not ;us dare. "

40Copy pinpoint40. It was also submitted on behalf of the appellant/s that even if D there is some mistake or casus omissus or defect in the phraseology used by the Legislature, the court cannot aid the Legislature's defective phrasing of an Act or add and amend or, by construction, make up the deficiencies which are left in the Act, placing reliance on the decisions in Nalinakhya Bysack v. Shyam Sunder Haldar & Ors. (1953) SCR E 533; Punjab Land Development & Reclamation Corporation Ltd. v. Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Chandigarh (1990) 3 SCC 682; Union of India & Anr. v. Deoki Nandan Aggarwal ( 1992) Supp. 1 SCC 323; and Padma Sundara Rao (Dead) & Ors. v. State of T. N. & Ors. (2002) 3 sec 533.

41Copy pinpoint41. In The Commissioner of Sales Tax, U.P., Lucknow v. Mis. Parson Tools & Plants, Kanpur (supra), this Court has laid down that ifthe Legislature wilfully omits to incorporate something of an analogous law in a subsequent statute, or even if there is a casus omissus in a statute, the language of which is otherwise plain and unambiguous, the Court is not competent to supply the omission by engrafting on it or G introducing in it, under the guise ofinterpretation, by analogy or implication, something what it thinks to be a general principle ofjustice and equity.

42Copy pinpoint42. In Punjab Land Development and Reclamation Corpn. Ltd., Chandigarh v. Presiding Officer, Labour Court (supra), this Court has laid down that when there is gap in the provision, it should be remedied H