Lrs IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION No.6775 OF 2008 Michael Bhagaji Ganaraj & Ors. ..Petitioners. vs. State of Maharashtra and Ors ..Respondents. Mr G.S.Godbole with Mrs Manjiri for the Petitioners. Mr C.R.Sonawane, A.G.P., for Respondent Nos.1 to 3. CORAM: D.K. DESHMUKH AND K.K.TATED,JJ DATED: 2nd DECEMBER,2009 P.C.:- Rule. Returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of parties. Pursuant to the return filed by the predecessors-in-title of the petitioners after commencement of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation)Act, 1976 (hereinafter referred to as the U.L.C Act ), land admeasuring 2826 square meters was declared as surplus land from their holding. Further, by order dated 29th November, 1996, the land admeasuring 19827.50 square meters was also declared as surplus land. A corrigendum was issued on 19.4.1997, as a result of which land admeasuring 21423.75 square meters was finally declared as surplus. It appears that a declaration under Section 10(3) of the U.L.C.Act,was issued on 18.9.2003. Thereafter, a revision application was filed before the State Government. That revision challenging the order declaring the land surplus from the holding of the predecessors-in-title of the petitioners was rejected on 27.11.2007. However, it appears that at the hearing a request was made on behalf of the petitioners that they may be permitted to submit a scheme under Section 20 of the U.L.C.Act for exemption of surplus land. The Government accepted that request and ordered that in case the petitioners submit a scheme under Section 20 for exemption that should be considered. The order in the revision was passed on 27.11.2007 by the Government. The Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act,1999 was repealed in the State of Maharashtra on 29.11.2007. The case of the petitioners is that after 27th November, 2007, they did not submit any application or scheme to the State Government for exemption and they continued to be in possession of the surplus land on 29.11.2007 when the U.L.C.Act was repealed. Therefore, according to the petitioners, in terms of the provisions of the Urban Land (Ceiling & Regulation) Repeal Act, 1999 all further proceedings in relation to the lands which are subject matter of this petition under the U.L.C. Act lapse. We have heard learned counsel for the parties. We have perused affidavit filed on behalf of the Respondents. It is clear from the record that though notification under Section 3 (1) of the U.L.C.Act was issued, action under sub-section (5) of Section 10 was never taken and it does not appear to be in dispute that the petitioners are in possession of the land and, therefore, in view of the provisions of the Repeal Act,and the view taken by the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Voltas Ltd.,and anr. vs. Addl. Collector and Competent Authority and ors. Reported in 2008 (5) Bom.C.R. 746 this petition deserves to be allowed. It is declared that all further proceedings in relation to the land which is the subject matter of this petition under the U.L.C.Act have abated. Rule is made absolute accordingly. No order as to costs. (D.K. DESHMUKH,J) (K.K.TATED,J)