1 lgc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 2420 OF 2009 Devram Dattaram Patil & ors. : Petitioners versus The State of Maharashtra & ors. : Respondents. Mr.A C Singh a/w Mr D R Shah for the Petitioners. Mr. C R Sonawane, AGP, for Respondent Nos.1 and 2. Mr S R Rajguru a/w Ms Bharati Mahant for Union of India. CORAM : S B MHASE & R M SAVANT, JJ. DATE : 27th August 2009 P.C. 1. Heard. The Petitioners are desirous of relieving themselves of the obligations under the scheme sanctioned under Section 20 of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976. The State Government granted exemption to the Petitioners under Section 20 of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 vide two sanction orders dated 12 th June 2002 and 19 th June 2002. Under the said sanction orders the Petitioners have to surrender certain number of flats to the Government for being sold at a fixed price. 2. Now the learned counsel for the Petitioner contends that on account of the the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Repeal Act, 1999 2 the said obligation no more survives. This submission is without any merit. The schemes under Section 20 have been specifically saved by the Repeal Act and that is rightly so because if the schemes were not available, the Government could have taken possession of the surplus land immediately after its declaration as such by the Competent Authority. It is therefore not permissible for the Petitioners who have taken advantage of the scheme to now contend that their obligation does not survive after the repeal of the Act. In our view, the Petitioners cannot take benefit of the scheme and thereafter deprive the Government from getting the flats under the scheme. 3. The reliance of the Petitioners on the judgment in the case of Voltas Ltd and Anr. v Additional Collector and ors. reported in 2008(5) Bom.C.R.746 is misconceived. In the said judgment a Division Bench of this Court has held that the proceedings under the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 lapse if the possession has not been taken prior to the Repeal Act coming into force which is 29-11-2007. Such is not the case here, in the instant case the Scheme under Section 20 has been sanctioned as long back as on 12 th June 2002 and 19 th June 2002 and which scheme has already been implemented by the Petitioners by constructing buildings. The said judgment therefore has no 3 application. 4. The above Petition is therefore bereft of any merit and is accordingly dismissed. [R.M.SAVANT, J] [S.B.MHASE, J]