1 lgc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.4542 OF 2008 Ganesh Pandurang Kishmatrao & ors. : Petitioners. Versus Deputy Collector and Competent Authority Urban Agglomeration, Ulhasnagar and ors. : Respondents. Mr.S S Kulkarni i/by Mr. S G Karandikar for the Petitioners. Smt. P S Cardoza, AGP for the Respondents/State CORAM : P B MAJMUDAR, R M SAVANT, JJ. DATED : 30th June 2010. P.C. 1 Rule, made returnable forthwith and heard by the consent of the parties. 2 The Petitioners claim to be the owners of certain lands in Thane District. On the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 (hereinafter referred to as “the said Act”) coming into force Petitioners had filed returns under Section 6 of the said Act. The said returns came to be adjudicated by the authorities and an order under Section 8(4) of the said Act came to be passed 26/7/1989 declaring certain lands of the Petitioners as surplus vacant lands. A notification under Section 10(1) was issued in the year 1989 and the Notification under Section 10(3) of the said Act was 2 published in the gazette on 22/12/2005. It is submitted that the action of the competent authority was challenged by the Petitioners by preferring a revision application on 15/12/2005 under Section 34 before the Government, but the said revision application was not decided by the Government. Thereafter on 18/1/2006 a notice under section 10(5) was issued calling upon the Petitioners to hand over the possession of the lands in question. But admittedly the possession of the lands in question has not been taken by the concerned competent authority. 3 The Petitioners have approached this Court for the reliefs claimed in the above Petition relying upon the repeal of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act by the State of Maharashtra which repeal has come into force on 29th November 2007. 4 On behalf of the State/Respondents an affidavit in reply has been filed by one Balaram Dhondu Jadhav, Deputy Collector and Competent Authority, Ulhasnagar Urban Agglomeration, Thane dated 25th June 2010. In Para 3 the affiant goes on to state that though the notification/notices have been issued under Sections 10(1), 10(3) and 10(5) of the said Act, the actual and physical possession of the subject land was not taken by the Respondents. In the light of the law laid down by this Court in the matter of Voltas Ltd and ors v/s. Additional Collector and Competent Authority, reported in 2008(5) BCR 746 in view of the fact that the possession of the land in question has not been taken prior to 29th November 2007, the proceedings, if any, under the said Act have therefore abated in view of the repeal of the said Act. 3 5 The above Petition, therefore, would have to be allowed and is accordingly allowed in terms of the prayer clauses (b) (c) and (d) of the Petition.Rule is accordingly made absolute to the aforesaid extent. [R.M.SAVANT,J] [P B MAJMUDAR, J]