1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.6965/2008 Mahadeo Bajirao Patil Petitioner Vs. The State of Maharashtra & Ors. Respondents Mr.Amit Borkar for the petitioner Ms.M.P.Thakur,AGP for Res.1 & 2 Coram : J.N.Patel & Mrs.Mridula Bhatkar,JJ. Date : 17th July,2009 P.C.(Mrs.Mridula Bhatkar,J.) . Rule. 2] Rule returnable forthwith and heard finally by consent . 3] The petitioner has filed this petition challenging the notification dt.11.6.2007 issued under section 10(3) of the Urban Land (Ceiling & Regulation)Act,1976..Earlier land Gat no.922, at Karveer,Tal.Karveer,Dist.Kolhapur was owned by Sadashiv J.Jadhav. He had mortgaged this land with Maharashtra State Co-operative Bank and the petitioner has purchased this land in auction on 28/6/1982. Thus,the petitioner is auctioned purchaser of this land. Respondent no.2 without giving notice to the petitioner and considering objections by the erstwhile owner passed an order under section 8(4) of the Urban Land (Ceiling & Regulation)Act,1976 2 declaring land gat no.922, Kasba Karveer to be vacant land .It is contended that proposal for scheme under section 20 of the Urban Land (Ceiling & Regulation)Act,1976 was filed by the legal representatives of Sadashiv Jayaram Jadhav.It is contended that the possession of the land is not taken by the respondents. Hence this petition. 4] The respondents have filed affidavit in reply opposing the petition. It is agreed by them that the possession of the land was not taken by the respondents and it is with the petitioner. 5] The Urban Land (Ceiling & Regulation)Act,1976 was repealed on 29/11/2007 and so the proceedings under the said Act are abated since the said date. In the present matter the Government has not taken any steps for possession of the surplus land under section 10(3) of the said Act prior to 29/11/2007. Thus,the case of the petitioner is covered under the decision of the Supreme Court Mukarram Ali Khan Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh &Ors.(2007),11 Supreme Court Cases 90; in which it is held as follows- 5]Section-4 of the Repeal Act reads as follows : 4.Abatement of legal proceedings- All legal proceedings relating to any order made or purported to be made under the Principal Act pending immediately before the commencement of this 3 Act ,before any Court, tribunal or other authority shall abate; Provided that this section shall not apply to the proceedings relating to Sections 11,12,13 and 14 of the principal Act insofar as such proceedings are relatable to the land,possession of which has been taken over by the State Government or any person duly authorised by the State Government in this behalf or by the competent authority. 6] In view of the affidavit filed by the appellant to which no objection has been filed,undisputed position is that the State has not taken the possession over the surplus land.Therefore,the proceedings have to be treated to have abated under Section 4 of the Repeal Act. 6] Further reliance is placed on Voltas and Others Vs.Additional Collector & Competent Authority ,2008(5) Bom.C.R.746 and the SLP preferred against this decision was dismissed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. 7] The petition will therefore have to be allowed in terms of prayer clause (b),& (c) which read as follows. (b) By appropriate writ,order or direction,this Hon’ble Court be pleased to declare the Petitioner to be the owner of Gat no.922 at Kasba Karveer,Tal.Karveer,Dist.Kolhapur ,admeasuring 9408 sq.mtrs. (c) By writ in the nature of certiorary or by any other writ, order or direction, this Hon’ble Court be pleased to quash and set aside the impugned Notification dated 11/6/2007 annexed to this petition at EXHIBIT -G and final statement under section 9 dated 27/9/1982 annexed to this petition at EXHIBIT-E and further be 4 pleased to declare Gat No.922 released from the provisions of the Urban Land (Ceiling & Regulation)Act,1976. Rule made absolute with no order as to costs. (J.N.Patel,J.) (Mrs.Mridula Bhatkar,J.) SRS