# MANEKLAL CHHOTALAL & ORS v. M. G. MAKWANA & ORS - **Citation:** [1967] 3 S.C.R. 65 - **Court:** Supreme Court of India - **Decided:** 1967-03-02 - **Case number:** Writ Petition No. 64 of 1966 - **Bench:** K. SuBBA RAo, J. c. SHAH, s. M. SI:KRI, v. RAMASWAMI, C. A. Vaidialingam - **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/supreme-court-of-india/maneklal-chhotalal-ors-v-m-g-makwana-ors-3986 - **Pages:** 19 ## Headnote Constitution of India, 1950, Arts. 14, 19 and 31; and Seventh Schedule, List II, Entry 18, and List Ill, Entry 20-Competency of State Legislature to enact Bombay Town Planning Act (27 of 1955)-Act as amended by Bombay Town Plannin11 (Guiarat Amendment and Validating Provisions) Act (52 of 1963), if violative of fundamental rights. The. Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation published, under s. 22 of the Bombay Town Planning Act, 1954, a declaration of its intent on tO make a town planning scheme in respect of certain areas which included the lands of the petitioners. The petitioners subm.tted their objection.• and suggestions. A draft Town Planning Scheme was published thereafter under s. 23(1) and the petitioners again subm'tted the same objec. lions. After considering the objections and suggestions~ the draft scheme was forwarded to the State Government under s. 28 (I). The State Government sanctiOned the scheme under s. 28(2) and appointed a Town Planning Officer under s. 31 (I). He· issued a public notice inviting objections and suggestions from owners of land and the pet tioners reiterated their objections. The Town Planning Officer, thereaf:er, gave his decision under s. 32 regarding the value of the land originally owned by the petitioners, the extent of reconstituted land allotted to them, the compensation payable to them, the value of the land allotted to them taking into account the improvements in the Scheme and the net amount payable by the petitioners as their share of the contribution towards the cost of the Scheme. As a result of the decision, the petitioners were allotted a much smaller extent of land than they originally owned and were directed to pay certain sum'S as their share of the contribution. On appeal under s. 34 the Board of Appeal slightly reduced the amount payable by the petitioners. The petitioners thereupon filed a writ petition in this Court and contended that : -~ 1) the State Legislature was not competent to enact the statute, and (2) the provisions of the Act, by conferring atbitrary powers on the authorities funcfoning under the Act., and by depriving the petitioners of their property, infringed their fundamental rights under Arts. 14, 19(1) (f) and 31. HELD : (1) The heads of leg'slation in the Lists of the Seventh Schedule to the Constitution should be given a large and liberal interpretat10n unless cut down by the terms of the item itself or by other parts oJ the Constitution, so that, they may have effect in their widest amplifude. Therefore. the v2rious aspects dealt with in the Act can be considered to deal with "land" in Entry 18 of List II and the competency of the State Legislature can be found in that enl!y. (78 F-G; 79 A, C-D, G] Navinchandra Mafatlal v. Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay City. (1955} I S.C.R. 829, Sri Ram Ram Narain Medhi v. State of Bombay, [1959] Supp. I S.C.R. 489 and Atma Ram v. State of Punjab, [1959] Supp. I S.C.R. 748, followed. 66 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1967] 3 $.C.R. The Act is a lei:islation to consolidate and amend the law for the making and execution of town planning schemes for the healthy Gnd orderly development of the area. With a view to achieve that purpose, a· very elaborate procedure and machinery is prescribed in the Act. Therefore, the competency of the State Legislature could also be rested on Entry No. 20 of List III, which deals with "Economic and Social Plan· ning". (79 G-H: 80 HJ ( 2) · The Act and the Rules make very elaborate provisions regarding the formalities to be gone through, at every stage, by the local authority, the State Government and other authorities concerned in preparing and making final the Town Planning Scheme. At all stages, very wide publicity is given to the proposals. Provision has been made for the filing of objections and suggestions and a duty is cast on the authorities to take them into account.· The procedure to be adopted by the Town Planning Officer in the matter of giving his decisions on the various aspects has ## Text _Characters 0–39,826 of 53,907. This is a partial read: ask again with offset=39826 for what follows._ A B c D ' G H MANEKLAL CHHOTALAL & ORS. v. M. G. MAKWANA & ORS. March 2, 1967 (K. SuBBA RAo, c. J., J. c. SHAH, s. M. SI:KRI, v. RAMASWAMI AND C. A. VAIDIALINGAM, JJ.J Constitution of India, 1950, Arts. 14, 19 and 31; and Seventh Schedule, List II, Entry 18, and List Ill, Entry 20-Competency of State Legislature to enact Bombay Town Planning Act (27 of 1955)-Act as amended by Bombay Town Plannin11 (Guiarat Amendment and Validating Provisions) Act (52 of 1963), if violative of fundamental rights. The. Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation published, under s. 22 of the Bombay Town Planning Act, 1954, a declaration of its intent on tO make a town planning scheme in respect of certain areas which included the lands of the petitioners. The petitioners subm.tted their objection.• and suggestions. A draft Town Planning Scheme was published thereafter under s. 23(1) and the petitioners again subm'tted the same objec. lions. After considering the objections and suggestions~ the draft scheme was forwarded to the State Government under s. 28 (I). The State Government sanctiOned the scheme under s. 28(2) and appointed a Town Planning Officer under s. 31 (I). He· issued a public notice inviting objections and suggestions from owners of land and the pet tioners reiterated their objections. The Town Planning Officer, thereaf:er, gave his decision under s. 32 regarding the value of the land originally owned by the petitioners, the extent of reconstituted land allotted to them, the compensation payable to them, the value of the land allotted to them taking into account the improvements in the Scheme and the net amount payable by the petitioners as their share of the contribution towards the cost of the Scheme. As a result of the decision, the petitioners were allotted a much smaller extent of land than they originally owned and were directed to pay certain sum'S as their share of the contribution. On appeal under s. 34 the Board of Appeal slightly reduced the amount payable by the petitioners. The petitioners thereupon filed a writ petition in this Court and contended that : -~ 1) the State Legislature was not competent to enact the statute, and (2) the provisions of the Act, by conferring atbitrary powers on the authorities funcfoning under the Act., and by depriving the petitioners of their property, infringed their fundamental rights under Arts. 14, 19(1) (f) and 31. HELD : (1) The heads of leg'slation in the Lists of the Seventh Schedule to the Constitution should be given a large and liberal interpretat10n unless cut down by the terms of the item itself or by other parts oJ the Constitution, so that, they may have effect in their widest amplifude. Therefore. the v2rious aspects dealt with in the Act can be considered to deal with "land" in Entry 18 of List II and the competency of the State Legislature can be found in that enl!y. (78 F-G; 79 A, C-D, G] Navinchandra Mafatlal v. Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay City. (1955} I S.C.R. 829, Sri Ram Ram Narain Medhi v. State of Bombay, [1959] Supp. I S.C.R. 489 and Atma Ram v. State of Punjab, [1959] Supp. I S.C.R. 748, followed. 66 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1967] 3 $.C.R. The Act is a lei:islation to consolidate and amend the law for the making and execution of town planning schemes for the healthy Gnd orderly development of the area. With a view to achieve that purpose, a· very elaborate procedure and machinery is prescribed in the Act. Therefore, the competency of the State Legislature could also be rested on Entry No. 20 of List III, which deals with "Economic and Social Plan· ning". (79 G-H: 80 HJ ( 2) · The Act and the Rules make very elaborate provisions regarding the formalities to be gone through, at every stage, by the local authority, the State Government and other authorities concerned in preparing and making final the Town Planning Scheme. At all stages, very wide publicity is given to the proposals. Provision has been made for the filing of objections and suggestions and a duty is cast on the authorities to take them into account.· The procedure to be adopted by the Town Planning Officer in the matter of giving his decisions on the various aspects has been indicated in s. 32 and in the Rules made under the Act. Principles have also been laid down regarding the fixing of the value of the original and the reconstituted plots., and for fixing the amount of contribution payable by the various owners of land. The contribution was l'ayable in easy instalments and was towards the cost of the scheme which the local authority had to incur and was not a tax or fee. All important decisions of the Town Planning Officer are appealable to a Board of Appeal presided over by a Judicial Officer of the status of a District Judge, and the procedure to be adopted by the Board is also clearly indicated in the Act and Rules. Therefore, the Act does not vest any arbitrary or unguided power in the authorities and only imposes reasonable restrictions on the petitioners' right to hold property. Hence, the Act is not violative of Art. 14 and is sa9ed by Art. 19(5). [71 C-D; 82 A-D, H; 83 A-B, G] The petitioners have no doubt lost a large extent of land. But, having due regard to the scheme of the Act and the object sought to be achieved, such results are inevitable. Moreover, the reconstituted plots. though of a lesser area have a higher value in view of the various improvements, and so what the petitioners lost in actual area had been more than sufficiently compensated by the increased value. Therefore .. there is no question of any deprivation of property so as to attract Art. 31. [83 D-F] ORIGINAL JURISDICTION : Writ Petition No. 64 of 1966. Petition under Art. 32 of the Constitution of India for the . enforcement of fundamental rights. B. Sen, Tricumla/ J. Patel and 1. N. Shroff, for the petitioners. B c D E F H. D. Banajee, R. Ganapathy Iyer, R. H. Dhebar and S. P. G Nayyar, for respondents Nos. 1, 3 and 4. Purshottam Tricumdas, Vithalbhai Patel, 0. C. Mathur, J.B. Dadachanji and Ravinder Narain, for respondent no. 2. D. R. Prem and S. P. Nayyar, for the intervener. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by Vaidialingam, J. In this writ petition, under Art. 32 of the Constitution, the petitioners challenge the constitutional validity H CHHOTALAL v. MAKWANA (Vaidialingam, J.) 67" A of the Bombay Town Planning Act, 1954 (Bombay Act XXVII of 1955) (hereinafter called the Act), as originally framed, and also after its amendment, by the Bombay Town Planning {Gujarat Amendment and Validating Provisions) Act, 1963 (Gujarat Act LU of 1963) (hereinafter called the Amending Act). They also, challenge and seek to have quashed, all action and proceedings B that have been taken by the respondents, tinder the Act, in relation · to the Town Planning Scheme, No. 19 (Memnagar), Ahmedabad. The circumstances under which the petitioners have come to this Court may be briefty indicated. The petitioners, who are stated to be members of a Hindu Undivided Family, owned certain extent of lands in two areas viz .• Usmanpur Section and ( Wadej Section. In the former, they claim to have owned lands bearing survey numbers 41/1, 41/2, 42, 51/l, 51/2 and 43, referred to as plot nos. 22 and 22-A, measuring 56, 164 sq. yds. · In Wadej Section, again, they owned 14,520 sq. yds, in survey nos. 106, 3/1, 106/4, referred to as plot no. 195. Both these Sections are within the jurisdiction of the second respondent D herein, the Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation. The second respondent, by resolution No. 475, d_at~d August 20, 1959, declared its intention to make a Town Planning Scheme No. 19 (Memnagar), under s. 22(1) of the Act, in respect of certain areas of land, which included ·the· above-mentioned lands of the petitioners. The said declaration was published in the E Bombay Government Gazette, dated September 3, 1959. A notification was issued on November 16, 1959, stating that the second respondent was preparing a Draft Town Planning Scheme, and stating that interested persons may appear before the Town Planning Committee, on December 2, 1959, at 4 p.m., for the purpose of having the proposals contained in the Scheme explained F to the public and to elicit suggestions from the public with regard to those proposals. The petitioners appeared before the said Committee, on December 2, 1959, and raised certain objections, and also offered some suggestions for modifying the Scheme. Written objections were also submitted by the petitioners, on or about January 9, G 1960, to the Town Planning Committee. The petitioners pointed out that in Usmanpur and Wadej Sections they owned lands to the exte~t, a~proximately, of 70,180 sq. yds., but in the proposals as contamed m the Draft Scheme, they were expected to get only 19,087 sq. yds. and, as such, they stood to lose nearly 12 % of ~ir lands, They also pointed out that they had been made H 1\able to pay a heavy contribution of Rs. 30,137 /-. The petitioners suggested that the loss to each land-owner should be equitably distributed under the Scheme and that they should be· allotted lands of equal extent. · SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1967) 3 S.C.R. On June 13, 1960, a Draft Town Planning Scheme was prepared, under s. 23 ( 1) of the Act, and it was published in the Guiarat Government Gazette, dated June 23, 1960. The p.:titioners, again, submitted the same objections and suggestions, which they had placed for consideration, before the Town Planning Committee. After considering the objections and suggestions made by the petitioners, the second respondent forwarded the Draft Town Planning Scheme to the third respondent, the State of Gujarat, under s. 28 ( 1) of the Act. The third respond~nt, again, sanctioned the said Draft Scheme, under s. 28(2) of the Act and also appointed a Town Planning Officer, under s. 31 ( 1) of the Act. Subsequently, there was a change in the personnet of the Town Planning Officer, originally appointed. Ultimately, the Town Planning Officer issued a public notice in October 1961, inviting objections and suggestions from owners of lands in respect of the Draft Town Planning Scheme, which was being considered by him The petitioners, again, filed objections in November 1961, before the said Town Planning Ollicer, and here also they reiterated the same objections and suggestions which they had placed before the Town Planning Committee at the earlier stage, and before the second respondent, later. In the Draft Scheme prepared by the second respondent, and sanctioned by the State of Gujarat, the petitioners' lands, viz .. survey nos. 41/1, 41/2, 51/1, 51/2 (being plot no. 22) and survey no. 43 (being plot no. 22A) were shown as item no. 18, and lands, survey nos. 106, 3/1 and 106/4 (plot no. 195) were shown as item no. 163. The Town Planning Officer i>sued notices in April and June 1962, to the petitioners. In the first notice, it was mentioned that the petitioners were being allotted new plots, nos. 32, 34 and 43, measuring 19,087 sq. yds as against plots nos. 22 and 22-A, measuring 56, I 64 sq. yds. It was also stated that the value of the original plots nos. 22 and 22-A, was Rs. 37,556/- and of the new plots nos. 32, 34 and 43, was Rs. 14.315 /- and that, in consequence, the petitioners were entitled to a payment of compensation. under s. 67, in the sum of Rs. 23,241 /-. The notice further stated that the value of plots nos. 32, 34 and 43, after taking into account the improvements in the Scheme, was Rs. 1.35,590/-, and. after deducting the price of those plots, without reference to the improvements, viz .. Rs. 14.315/-, the increase, under s. 65 of the Act, was R<. 1,21.275/-. The neti•ioner. were therefore liahle to pay a contribution; under s. 66, at the rate of 50% on the increment, viz .. Rs. 60,638/-; and after givirg credit to the petitioners, in the sum of Rs. 23,241 /-, they were called upon to pay a sum of Rs. 37.397 /-. c D F G H B c CHHOTALAL v. MAKWANA (Vaidialingam, I.) 69 The second notice also mentioned that, as against the petitioners' plot no. 195, measuring 14,520 sq. yds., n~ other plot was being allotted to them and that the compensauon payable to them m respect of the said plot, without reterencc to the .improvements in the Scheme, was Rs. 7,260/-. By virtue of these lwo notices, the petitioners were being allotted tresh plots of an extent of 19,087 sq. yds., and they were called upon to pay a sum of Rs. 30,133/-, as their share of contribution, and they were also required . to furnish thei~ objections or. suggestions., wi~in the time specified. The peuuoners filed the1r written ob1ecuons to the proposals contained in the said two notices; and they also appeared on the dates mentioned in the notices and reiterated the matters contained in their written objections. The first respondent herein, the Town Planning Officer, issued ou January 20, 1965, two communications, stated to be his award, under s. 32(3) of the Act. In the first of these communications, the petitioners were informed that in lieu of their plot no. 22, measuring 37,873 sq. yds., they were allotted Final Plots nos. 52, D 54 and 57, measuring 20,183 sq. yds., and the value, under s. 67, was fixed at Rs. 8,222/-. The petitioners were also informed that tire calculation of increment of the value of 20,183 sq. yds allotted to them, under s. 65, was Rs. 1,08,483/- and, at the rate cf 50%, as per s. 66 of the Act, they were liable to pay a contribution of Rs. 54,241/-. After adjusting the value of the lands, E o[ Rs. 8,424/, the net contribution payable by the petitioners was stated to be Rs. 45,817/-. Similarly, in the second communication, the petitioners were informed of the allotment of final plot no. 94, measuring 15.375 sq. yds, as against plot nos. 22A and 195 measuring in the agl!regate 32,307 sq. yds. The petitioners were further informed that F for the loss of 16,932 sq. yds. they would be entitled to compensation under s. 67, in the sum of Rs. 4,622/-. The cidculation of increment, with reference to improvement in resnect of the final plots.allotted as per s. 65, was stated to be Rs. 65.344/-. In consequence, the share of contribwion, under s. 66. payable bv the petitioners at the rate of 50%, was fixed in the sum of Rs. 32.6721-. G Adjusting the sum of Rs. 4.622/- being the comnensation nav- ~ble to the petitioners. their net liability, as contribution, was fixed m the sum of Rs. 28,050/-. • The final po~ition, under these two· notices, was that the petitioners were gettml! land of an extent of 35.558 sQ. vd,;., as against the original extent of land of 70.180 sq. yds., and they had to pay H a sum of Rs. 73,867 /- as contribution. The petitioners preferred anpeals to the Board of Appeal, under s. 34 .of the Act. The Board of Appeal reduced the 7Q SUPRBMB COURT REPORTS (1967) 3 S.C.R. increased value of the final plots by giving a general reduction of 60 paise per square yard. As a result of the appeal, the petitioners had still to pay a contribution of a sum of Rs. 63,199/-, .apart from losing 34,622 sq. yds., of land. The Town Planning Officer made consequential changes in his original award, incorporating the decision of the Board and forwarded the final Scheme to the State Government for its sanction. It is, at that siagc, the petitioners have come to this Court, seeking the reliefs mentioned above. The main contentions raised by Mr. B. Sen, learned counsel for the petitioners, are: (i) The State LegiSTature was not competent to pass the Act as the subject, dealt with under the Act, is not covered by any of the entries in List II, or List III, of the Seventh Schedule to the Constitution. iii) Even assuming that the State Legislature could pass the Act in question, nevertheless, the provisions regarding the levy of contribution towards the cost of the Scheme and all other matters relating to the working of the scheme, are unauthorised and unreasonable and that the powers vested in the Town Planning Officer, and the other authorities, under the Act, are unguided, arbitrary and uncontrolled and, therefore, the provisions of the Act infringe the fundamental rights of the petitioners under Arts. 14, 19(1)(f) & (g), and 31 of the Constitution. On behalf of the State, the third respondent, Mr. H. D. Banajce, learned counsel, has pointed out that the State Legislature w:is competent to pass the Act in question. In particular, he supports the competency of the Legislature to enact the measure in question, on the basis of Entries nos. 6 and 18 of List II, and Entry no. 20 of List III, of the Seventh Schedule. Counsel also points out that a local authority, with a view to achieve a systematic and proper planning, providing amenities like water-supply, drainage, roads, etc., has been empowered to go in for a townplanning scheme. After providing for these amenities, and allotting sites for public purposes like schools, hospitals, markets, police-stations etc., the remaining lands are re-constituted by changing their boundaries in order to make the areas capable of being properly developed. Re-constituting of the plots is absolutely necessary inasmuch as in working out the Scheme, some area from an ad.ioining land may have to be added and some other area from the original holding may have to be taken away, as may be necessary, and to achieve the purposes for which a planned development scheme is framed. As far as possible, each owner of land is given a new plot, though it may not be of the same extent or in the same area. And, in exceptional cases, when the owner loses a holding altogether, he is awarded compensation. A B c D E F G H CHHOTALAL v. MAKWANA (Vaidialingam, I.) 71 A By reference to the Act and the rules framed thereunder, counsel pointed out that elaborate provisions have been made as to how the local authorities, in framing the Scheme, had to flinction, as also how the Town Planning Officer, who works the Scheme, has to act. Opportunity had been provided, at every stage, right from the beginning to the end, counsel points out, ll to owners of property, like the petitioners, to place their objections and suggestions. The petitioners also had taken advantage of those provisions and had been heard and their objections considered. All the important decisions of tlie ToWll Planning Officer are made the subject of appeals to a Board of Appeal, of which the President is ari ex~rienced judicial officer of the status. of a C District Judge. Principles had also been laid down by the Act regarding the fixing of valuation of the original plots and the reconstituted plots and for fixing the amount of contributien • payable by parties. Payment of contribution was to be in easy instalments. None of the fundamental rights of the petitioners, according to Mr. Banajce,' had been affected. D These contentions of the State have been supported by Mr. Purshottam Tricumdas, learned counsel appearing for the Ahmedabad Municipal CorporatiOn, the second respondent herein. This will be a convenient stage to refer to the scheme of the Act and consider the question as to whether the State Legislature E is competent to enact this legislation, because, if the contentions of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the State Legislature had no competence to enact this measure is accepted, no other questions will arise for consideration. F H There was, originally, an Act called the Bombay Town Planning Act, 1915 (Bombay Act I of 1915), which has been repealed by s. 90(1) of the Act. The object of the 1915 Act is stated to be 'to provide for the making and execution of townplaning schemes'. The preamble to the said legislation sta!U that it was found expedient that the development of certain areas sbould be regulated with the general object of securing proper sanitary conditions, amenity and convenience to the persons living in such areas and in neighbouring areas. We only refer to the 1915 Act for the limited purpose of showing that the said Act was conceived with the intention of regulating the development of certain areas for the purpose of securing proper sanitary conditions etc., to the persons living not only in such areas, but 11lso in n~ighbouring areas. The Acl came into force on April l, 1957, and, there is no co.atroversy, that it has been made applicable to the State of Gujarat. In some respect the. Act was amended by the Amend- 72 SUPllBMB COUllT llBPOllTS [t 967] 3 s.c.a. ing Act of 1963. The Act is a legislation to consolidate and A amend the law for the making and execution of town planning' schemes, and, in order to ensure that town planning schemes arc made in a proper manner and their execution is made effective. Sub-sections (2), (4), (6) and (9) of s. 2, define the expressions 'development plan', 'local authority', 'plot' and 'reconstituted plot', In particular, the expression 'reconstituted plot' means a plot which is in any way altered by the making of a town planning scheme. Sections 3 to 17, in Chapter II, deal with development plans. Section 3 makes it obligatory on a local authority to carry out a survey of the area within its jurisdiction and to prepare and publish, in the prescribed manner, a development plan and to submit the same to the S.ate Government for sanction, Sub-section ( 4) of s. 3 gives power to the State Government to prepare and publish, in the prescribed manner, a development plan, in the circumstance> mentioned therein. Section 4 provides for the local authority making a declaration of its intention to prepare a development plan, before carrying out a survey for the purpose of preparing the. said plan, and a copy of, the said declaration is to be sent to the State Government for publication in the Gazette. It also provides for the declaration being published in the prescribed manner and for inviting suggestions from the public within two months of the date of publication. A copy of the development plan is to be sent to the State Government and another copy is to be made available, by the local authority, for inspection by the public. Under s. 7, the development plan has to indicate the manner in which the development and improvement of the area is to be carried out and regulated, and it shall contain the proposals mentioned in clauses (a) to ( e). The particulars referred to in s. 8 have to be published and submitted to the State Government, along with the development plan. Section 9 provides for the local authority considering any suggestions that may be made to such development plan, by any member of the public, if those suggestions are communicated in writing, within two months from the date of publication. Section 10 gives power to the State Government, after consulting the Consulting Surveyor, to sanction the development plan submitted to it· by .the local au•hority, ei•her without modification or subject to such modification as it consi1ers necessary. The sanction of the State Government has to be notified in the Officia 1 G1rette. Section 11 gives power to the local authority to acquire either by agreement or under the Land Acquisition Act of 1894. anv land designated in the develooment p1an for a purpose specified in clauses (b) to ( e) of s. 7. The remaining sections in Chapter Il, deal with matters like placing restriction on an owner doing any work on the land, after publication of the declaration of intention under s. 4(1 ), and the local authority granting permission to the owners' concerned. D E F G H ·, A B c D E F G H CHHOTALAL v. MilWANA (Yaidlalingam, 1.) 1.~ Chap,tcr ;m, comprising a.~, 18 to :20, deals with the making of and the contents of a town planning scheme. Section 18 p~ides for a local authority. subject to the provisions of the Act, or any other law for the time being in force, making one or more town planning schemes for the purpose of implementing the proposals contained in the final development plaii. The town planning scheme can provide for any of the matters mentioned in els. 1 (a) to (I) referred to in sub-s. (2) of s. 18. Section 19 relates to a decision being given by the Town Planning Officer, relating to disputed ownership of the properties comprised in the scheme, but it is made clear that any decision given by him, though not subject to appeal, shall not operate as a bar to a regular suit. It also makes provision for any decision given on this question by the Town Planning Officer being; corrected, modified or rescinded in the event of a Civil Court making an adjudication. Section 20 is an enabling; provision for the purpose of making or executing any town plallning scheme. Sections 21 to 30, which occur in Chapter IV, deal with the· declaration of intention to make. a scheme and the making of a draft scheme. A Town Planning Scheme, under s. 21, may be made, in accordance with the provisions of the Act, in respect of a land which is in the course of development~ or is likely to be used for building purposes, or is already built upon. Section 22 autho.riscs a local authority to declare its intention to make a town planning scheme by resolution. The local authority is to publish its declaration, within the time mentioned therein; and it is also· bound to despatch a copy thereof to the State Government, along with a plan showing the area which ·it proposes to include in the scheme. Sub-s. ( 4} of s. 22 provides for a copy of the plan being made available to the public for inspection. Section 23 provides fer the local authority, in consultation with the Consulting Surveyor, to make a draft scheme within twelve months of its declaration of intention and publish the same in the prescribed manner. Section 24 gives power to the State Government, in the circumstances mentioned therein, to require a local authority to make and publish a draft scheme and send it to the Government for approval. Section 25 specifics the various particulars which a draft scheme should contain. Section 26 provides that in the draft scheme, the size and shape of every reconstituted plot is to be determined in such a manner as to make it suitable for building purposes. If the plot is already built upon, it provides that the reconstitution is to ensure that the building, as far as possible, complies with the provisions of the scheme as regards open spaces. Sub-section (2) of s. 26 specifics the nature of proposals, to be found in the draft scheme. In particular, it provides for a reconstituted plot being fanned by alteration of the boundaries of the original plot; formation of reu Sup. CI/67--6 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1967) 3 S.C.R. constituted plot by the transfer, wholly or partly, of the adjoining lands; for allotting a plot to any owner dispossessed of land in furtherance of the scheme and for transfer of the ownership of a plot from one person to another. It may be stated, at this stage, that, as will be seen from sub-cl. ( d) of s. 26 ( 2), the intention of the Act appears to be that the Town Planning Scheme should, as far as possible, make the provisions for allotment of plots, to owners, who arc being dispossessd of their property. Section 27 relates to filing of objections, within one month from the date of publication of the draft scheme, and the local authority being bound to consider those objections and making suitable modifications, as it thinks fit, before submitting the draft scheme to the State Government. Under sub-s. (l) ot s. 28, the local authority has to forward, within the time mentioned therein, the draft scheme, together with any modifications made by it, along with the objections that may have been filed by persons affected by such scheme and make an application to the Stat~ Government for sanctioning the same. Sub-s. (2) provides for the State Government; after making such enquiry as it thinks fit and, after consulting the Consulting Surveyor, sanctioning th~ scheme with or without modifications; and the sanction is to be published in the State Gazette. Sub-s. (3) makes it obligatory when the State Government sanctions the scheme, to state in the notification itself, about the place and time the draft scheme will be open to the public for inspection. Chapter V, in which ss. 31 to 43 are to be found, deals with the Town Planning Officer and the Board of Appeal. Sectbn 31 deals with the appointment of a Town Plan!ling Officer, by the State Government, within one month from the date, on which its sanction to the draft scheme is published. It also provides for the State Government removing the said officer and appointin·~ another officer, in circurristances mentioned therein. Section 32 enumerates the duties of the Town Planning Officer. He i~ to act in accordance with the prescribed procedure, and decide the various matters mentioned in els. (i) to (xiv) of s. 3211 ). Among other matters, the Town Planning Officer has to fix the difference between the total values of the original plots and the total of the values of the plots included in the final scheme; estimate the portion of the sums payable as compensation on each plot used, allotted or reserved for a public purpose or purpose of the local authority which is beneficial to the owners and residents within the area of the scheme and partly to the general public and which are to be included in the cost of the scheme: estimate the increment to accrue in respect of each plot included ·in the final scheme; calculate the proportion in which the increment of the plots included in the final scheme shall be liable to contribution to the costs of the scheme; calculate the contribution A B c D E F G JI A B c D E F H CHHOTALAL v. MAKWANA (Vaidialinzam, J.) 75 to be levied on each plot included in the final scheme; determine the amount to be deducted from, or added to, as the case may be, in the contribution leviable from a person and provide for the total or partial transfer of any right in an original plot to a reconstituted plot or provide for the extinction of any right in an original plot. Section 33 makes the decision of the Town Planning Officer. rendered under s. 32( 1), final and conclusive, except in matters arising out of els. (v), (vi), (viii), (ix), (x) and (xiii) of sub-s. ( 1) of s. 32. Section 34 provides for decisions given by the Town Planning Officer, under the clauses as shown above, being communicated to the party concerned and it gives a right to any person aggrieved by that decision, to appeal, within on~ month from the date of communication of the decision, to the Principal Judge of the City Civil Court, Bombay, in Greater Bombay and elsewhere, to the District Judge. The appeal is to be disposed of by a Board of Appeal constituted under s. 35, according to which it should consist of a President and two Assessors, the President being the Principal Judge of the City Civil Court in Greater Bombay, or such other Judge of the said Court as may be appointed by the State Government, and elsewhere, the District Judge. Section 3 5 provides for the · appointment of fit and proper persons as Assessors, who are to sit with the President to constitute the Board of Appeal to decide an appeal against the decision of the Town Planning ·officer, under els. (v), (vi). (viii),