IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY THE 10TH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION NO : 4069 of 2003 Between: 1 P.Sreeramulu, S/o.late P.Pntaiah, R/o.18-7-686, Out side Lal Darwaja, Hyderabad. 2 P.Kadava Rao, S/o.Late P.Pentaiah, R/o.18-3-71, Chartinaka, Hyderabad. 3 Smt. P.Manoha Bai, W/o. lat Sri Bal Raj, R/o.18-3-3/1, Manik Nagar, Chatrinaka, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER(S) AND 1 The Commissioner, Appeals Andhra Pradsh, Hyderabad. 2 The Special Officer & Competent Authority, Urban Land Ceilings, Hyderabad. .....RESPONDENT(S) Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to to issue, an order, direction or writ, more particularly in the nature of writ of certiorary to quash the orders of the Respondent no.1 passed in proceedings No.HYD/61/92 dt. 16.5.2002 and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.Y.SUDERSHAN REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR ASSIGNMENT The Court made the following : ..... REGISTRAR THE HON’BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI W.P.NO.4069 2003 ORAL ORDER The petitioners herein are the wife and children of one P.Pentaiah who made a declaration under the provisions of the Urban Land (Ceiling And Regulation) Act,1976. After making necessary enquiry the 2nd respondent-Special Officer by order dated.21-02-1992 declared that Sri P.Pentaiah was the surplus land holder to an extent of 613.11 square meters in Sy.No.269 of Kandikal village. Aggrieved by the same P.Pentaiah filed an appeal before the 1st respondent under Section.33 of the Act. Pending appeal he died and the petitioners herein were brought on record as legal representatives. However, the 1st respondent by order dated.16-05-2002 dismissed the appeal confirming the order passed by the 2nd respondent. Pursuant thereto, the notice under Section.10(5) of the Act was issued on 22.01.2003. Immediately thereafter the petitioners filed the present writ petition challenging the orders of the respondents 1 and 2. This court while directing rule nisi by order dated.07-03-2003 granted interim stay of dispossession of the petitioners from the land in question. The said order continued to be in operation all through. The specific case of the petitioners that they are continuing in possession and enjoyment of the land in question has not been disputed in the counter-affidavit filed by the 2nd respondent. I have heard the learned counsel for both the parties. Learned counsel for the petitioners at the outset submitted that in view of the Urban Land (Ceiling & Regulation) Repeal Act, 1999 which was adopted by the Government of Andhra Pradesh w.e.f. 22-04-2008 the impugned orders passed by the 1st and 2nd respondents ceased to be in force. The Urban Land (Ceiling & Regulation) Repeal Act, 1999 (Central Act 15/1999) under which the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 was repealed, has been adopted in the State of Andhra Pradesh by passing a resolution by the A.P.State Legislature on 27-03-2008 and accordingly, the Urban Land (Ceiling & Regulation) Repeal Act, 1999 has come into force in the State of Andhra Pradesh w.e.f. 27-03-2008. Subsequently, the Government of Andhra Pradesh issued certain instructions vide Circular Memo dated 24-04-2008 with regard to the implementation of the Urban Land (Ceiling & Regulation) Repeal Act, 1999. On a combined reading of the Central Act 15 of 1999 together with the instructions issued by the Government of Andhra Pradesh, it is clear that all pending cases in different stages under Sections 8(1), 8(4), 10(1), 10(3) and Section 10(5) shall stand abated. The fact that as on today the petitioners are continuing in possession of the surplus land has not been disputed by the respondents. In the circumstances, the Repeal Act, 15 of 1999 is applicable and accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of declaring that the impugned orders passed by the respondents 1 and 2 dated 16.05.2002 and 21.02.1992 respectively ceased to be in force. No costs. _____________ G.ROHINI,J 10th December,2008 *TSNR