1 lgc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.510 OF 2010 Keshav Trimbak Wani and Anr : Petitioners versus The State of Maharashtra & ors. : Respondents. Mr. Girish Godbole for the Petitioner. Mr. P S Cardoza AGP for the Respondents/State CORAM : P B MAJMUDAR & R M SAVANT, JJ. DATE : 14 th 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. The Petitioners claim to have purchased the said lands from the heirs of erstwhile owner one Purushottam Vasudev Sathe. On the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 (hereinafter referred to as “the said Act”) coming into force the said Purushottam Sathe had filed return under Section 8 of the said Act. The said return came to be adjudicated by the authorities and an order under Section 8(4) of the said Act came to be passed 23rd April 1979 declaring certain land of the said owner as surplus vacant land. The said land 2 owner thereafter filed an appeal being ULC Appeal No.16 of 1997 against the said order passed under Section 8(4). The appeal came to be allowed by the Appellate authority by its judgment and order dated 24th September 1997 and the matter came to be remanded back to the Deputy Collector and Competent Authority for fresh computation of the surplus vacant land. Accordingly a fresh order dated 5th May 1998 came to be passed by the Competent Authority under Section 8(4) in respect of the land holdings of the said Purushottam Sathe, an area of 10795.46 sq.mtrs came to be declared as surplus vacant land. The said suplus area encompassed the land from the various villages which were owned by the said Purushottam Sathe. Thereafter it appears that an order dated 25th May 2005 under Section 10(2) of the said Act came to be passed by the Competent Authority, which included an area covered by the prayer clauses of the present Petition. This was followed by the Notification under Section 10(3) of the said Act dated 6th June 2005. However, the notice under Section 10(5) of the said Act has been disputed by the learned counsel for the Petitioners as no such notice was received by the Petitioners. In the interregnum the Petitioners had filed an application under Section 20 of the said Act for implementing a scheme for constructing tenements for the weaker section of the 3 soceity. The said scheme came to be sanctioned on 30th February 2004 but was restricted to Survey No.43-A-10 (CTS No.8801) admeasuring 448.45 sq.mtrs. 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. The Petitioners on the said basis have claimed reliefs vide prayer clauses (a) and (b) of the Petition restricted to the lands mentioned in the said prayer clauses and specifically excluding the lands covered by exemption order dated 30th February 2004. 4 On behalf of the State/Respondents an affidavit in reply has been filed by one Kamlesh Sakharam Sonale – Incharge Deputy Collector and Competent Authority, Ulhasnagar Urban Agglomeration, Thane dated 26th March 2010. After giving the factual back drop of the proceedings initiated under the said Act, the affiant has stated that the scheme under Section 20 has been sanctioned and then in Para 4 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 4 Act, the actual and physical possession of the subject land is 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. 5 The above Petition, therefore, would have to be allowed and is accordingly allowed in terms of the prayer clauses (c) and (d) of the Petition which reads as under :- “(C) “That it be held and declared that on account of the adoption of the provisions of the U.L.C. (C&R) Repeal Act, 1999 by the Maharashtra Legislative Assembly and Maharashtra Legislative Council by passing Resolutions dated 29.11.2007 under Article 252 (2) of the Constitution of India published in MGG dated 6.12.2007 being Exhibit “J” to this Writ Petition, the Notification dated 5.5.1998 issued u/s 10(1) of the U.L.C. (C&R) Act, 1976 and the consequential order issued by the Deputy Collector and Competent Authority the Respondent NO.2 herein dated 25.5.2005 issued u/s 10(2) of the U.L.C. (C&R) Act, 1976 being Exhibit “B”, the Notification dated 06.06.2005 issued u/s 10(3) of the U.L.C. (C&R) Act, 1976 being Exhibit “C” to this Writ Petition in so far as it relates to an area admeasuring 7778.50 sq.mtr. From land bearing 5 Survey No.81/5 Part of Village Kalyan, Taluka Kalyan, District Thane have abated and have lost their legal efficacy. (d) That this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue a consequential Writ of Certiorari thereby quashing and setting aside the Mutation Entry No.3203 made in V.F. No.6 of Village Kalyan, Taluka Kalyan, District Thane being Exhibit “D” to this Writ Petition in so far as it relates to land admeasuring 7778.50 sq.mt. from Survey No.81/5 Part of Village Kalyan, Taluka Kalyan, District Thane.” 6 It is clarified that the reliefs granted to the Petitioners in the above Petition is restricted to the lands mentioned in the prayer clauses (c) and (d) and land covered by the exemption order is not affected in any manner. 7 Rule is accordingly made absolute to the aforesaid extent. [R.M.SAVANT, J] [P.B.MAJMUDAR, J]