- 1 - IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.3314 OF 2008 ... M/s.Veekaylal Investment Co. and anr. ...Petitioners v/s. The State of Maharashtra & ors. ...Respondents ... Dr.V.V.Tulzapurkar with Mr.S.G.Karandikar for the Petitioners. Mr.A.H.Palekar, AGP for State. ... CORAM: D.K.DESHMUKH & J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ. DATED: 22ND SEPTEMBER, 2008 P.C.: Rule. Returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of parties. 2. Facts which are relevant and material for deciding this petition are that the land from the holding of the Petitioner was declared as surplus. By order dated 10-7-2006, notification under sub-section 1 of Section 10 of the Urban Land (Ceiling & Regulation) Act was issued. . Thereafter, on 18-9-2006 notification under sub-section 3 of Section 10 was issued, which was published in the official gazette dated 9-11-2006. - 2 - . Feeling aggrieved by the declaration of the surplus land as also the notification under sub-section 3 of Section 10 the Petitioner preferred an appeal under Section 33 of the Act before the Additional Commissioner, Konkan Division, Mumbai. That appeal was registered as Appeal No.401 of 2006. In that appeal an order directing the parties to maintain status-quo was made on 16-11-2006. Which order was continued till the appeal was decided by order dated 30-11-2006. By that order the appeal was dismissed. . Feeling aggrieved by that order the Petitioner preferred Writ Petition in this Court challenging that order, which was Writ Petition No.2475 of 2007. That writ petition was decided by order dated 27-4-2007. The court set aside the order passed by the appellate authority and remanded the appeal back to the appellate authority for fresh disposal. . It appears that during the pendency of the writ petition on 11-1-2007 an order under sub-section 5 of Section 10 of the Act was made by the competent authority directing the Petitioner to deliver possession of the surplus land on 31-1-2007. - 3 - 3. According to the Petitioner, the Petitioner did not deliver possession of the surplus land to the Government pursuant to the order issued under sub-section 5 of Section 10 as his petition was pending and thereafter the appeal itself was pending. The Urban Land Ceiling Act was repealed by Urban Land (Ceiling & Regulation) Repeal Act, 1999 with effect from 29-11-2007. It is the case of the Petitioner that he was in possession of the land declared as surplus on the date of repeal i.e. 29-11-2007. The Petitioner has categorically stated to that effect in the petition. 4. So far as the aspect of possession is concerned, the only submission on behalf of the Respondent is that there is an entry made in the revenue record that the surplus land vests in the State Government. Perusal of that entry which is produced on record shows that it is dated 10-7-2006. It means that the entry was taken on the same day on which the land was declared as surplus without a notification under sub-section 1 of Section 10 being issued and before notification under sub-section 3 of Section 10 was issued. In any case that entry cannot be said to be an entry which shows that possession of the surplus - 4 - land was delivered to the State Government because the order under sub-section 5 of Section 10 has been made on 11-1-2007 and that order specifically says that the land is in possession of the Petitioner. It is, thus, clear from the record that on 29-11-2007 the Petitioner was in possession of the surplus land and therefore, in view of the judgment of the Division Bench in the case Voltas Ltd. v/s. Additional Collector and Competent Authority, Writ Petition No.8356 of 2006, to which one of us is a party, as the surplus land was in possession of the Petitioner on 29-11-2007 petition will have to be allowed. 5. In the result, therefore, petition succeeds and is allowed. Rule made absolute in terms of prayer clauses (c) & (d). No order as to costs. (D.K.DESHMUKH, J.) (J.P.DEVADHAR, J.) - 5 - IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO.2168 OF 2008 AND CIVIL APPLICATION NO.1222 OF 2008 IN WRIT PETITION NO.3314 OF 2008 ... M/s.Veekaylal Investment Co. and anr. ...Petitioners v/s. The State of Maharashtra & ors. ...Respondents ... Dr.V.V.Tulzapurkar with Mr.S.G.Karandikar for the Petitioners. Mr.A.H.Palekar, AGP for State. Mr.Anil R. Mishra for the Applicant in C.A.No.2168 of 2008. ... CORAM: D.K.DESHMUKH & J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ. DATED: 22ND SEPTEMBER, 2008 P.C.: In view of the order passed in Writ Petition, these Civil Applications do not survive for consideration. Disposed of as such. (D.K.DESHMUKH, J.) (J.P.DEVADHAR, J.)