1wp-415-09 Lrs IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION No.415 OF 2009 Madan A.Mutha ..Petitioner. vs. The Collector of Kolhapur & Ors. ..Respondents. Mr R.D. Soni i/b M/s Ram & Co. for the Petitioner. Mr S.S.Patwardhan for respondent No.4. Mr V.S. Gokhale, A.G.P.,for Respondent  State. CORAM: D.K. DESHMUKH AND K.K.TATED,JJ DATED: 7TH DECEMBER,2009 P.C.:- The petitioner by this petition basically seeks declaration that as possession of the surplus vacant land was not taken before 29.11.2007, i.e., 2wp-415-09 the date on which the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 ( the U.L.C.Act for short) was repealed in the State of Maharashtra, he is entitled to declaration that all further proceedings in relation to his land abate in view of the provisions in the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Repeal Act,1999. What is, however, is to be seen that the petitioner, admittedly, is not the owner of the land. The owner of the land had executed only an agreement for sale in favour of the petitioner on 5-10-1990. It appears that Special Civil Suit No.151/91 was filed by the petitioner for decree of specific performance. The said suit was dismissed on 23.2.2006. In the mean time, on 27.2.2006 possession of the land was taken by the Government, pursuant to a panchnama and it appears that the land was allotted to respondent No.4 by the State Government and it appears from the application filed by the vendors in Civil Suit No.103/2006 which they had filed in the Civil Court accepting that possession of the surplus land was taken in 3wp-415-09 accordance with the law and that the vendors have entered into an arrangement with respondent No.4. Thus, the vendors of the petitioner have accepted the position that possession of the land was validly taken by the Government on 23.2.2006. According to the averments in the petition, after the suit was dismissed on 23.2.2006 the petitioner filed first appeal in this Court being First Appeal No. 1489 of 2006. The First Appeal was admitted by this Court on 10.7.2007 and interim order of ststus-quo was made on 17.9.2007. However, by that date possession of the land was already taken by the Government. The consequence was that, land vested in the State Government from the month of February, 2006 and the Government in its turn by an order dated 27 August, 2008 allotted the land to respondent No.4. Respondent No.4 has entered into an arrangement with the owner of the land. It is clear from the application filed by the owners of the land in the Civil Court in R.C.S.No. 103/2006 that they have accepted the validity of the action 4wp-415-09 taken by the Government under the U.L.C.,Act in relation to that land. What is further to be seen is that the Respondent No.4 Society, after the land was allotted to it, has also raised construction on the land after getting the building plan sanctioned. Taking over all view of the matter, therefore, in our opinion, in these circumstances, it will not be appropriate to interfere at the instance of the petitioner. The petition is therefore rejected. No order as to costs. (D.K. DESHMUKH,J) (K.K.TATED,J)