1 WRIT PETITION NO.870 OF 2008 lgc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.870 OF 2008 Smt.Lilavati Prabhakar Mhatre : Petitioner versus The Addl.Collector & Competent Authority Urban Agglomeration, Thane & ors. : Respondents. Mr. S G Karandikar for the Petitioner. Ms. P S Cardoza, AGP, for the State/Respondents. CORAM : P B MAJMUDAR & R M SAVANT, JJ. DATE : 16th July 2010 P.C. 1 Rule, by consent of the parties made returnable forthwith and heard. 2 The Petitioner claims to be the owner of the land bearing Survey No. 337/12 of village Goddev, Taluka and Dist.Thane. In so far as the land of the Petitioner is concerned, the authorities proceeded on the basis that the land held by the Petitioner was surplus vacant land under the meaning of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976, and a scheme under the said Act came to be approved in respect of the land admeasuring 2050 sq.mtrs. on 27/10/1995. Thereafter on account of the fact that the Petitioner/land owner did not comply with the conditions of the said scheme, the said scheme came to be cancelled by taking recourse to Section 20(2) of the said Act on 13/6/2005. 3 The Petitioner, being aggrieved by the said cancellation of the scheme, filed a Revision before the Respondent No.2 under Section 34 of the said Act. In the 2 WRIT PETITION NO.870 OF 2008 mean time, Notification under Section 10(3) came to be issued on 28/6/2005. Thereafter notice under section 10(5) for handing over the possession of the land in question came to be issued to the Petitioner on 19/11/2007. It would be relevant to note that in respect of the Revision filed by the Petitioner, a notice came to be issued to him on 29/9/2007 calling upon the Petitioner to remain present before the Respondent No.2 for hearing. Ultimately an order came to be passed on 22/11/2007 rejecting the Petitioner’s Revision and thereby cancellation of the scheme was confirmed. 4 The Petitioner has filed the instant Petition relying upon the repeal of the said Act by Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Repeal Act 1999 to contend that the proceedings initiated against the Petitioner stand abated. In so far as the said aspect is concerned, in view of the law laid down by this Court in the matter of Voltas Ltd. & ors. v/s. Additional Collector and Competent Authority reported in 2008(5) BCR 746, the factum of possession of the land in question is a crucial determining factor as to whether the relief sought for the Petitioner in the instant Petition can be granted, an Affidavit in reply has been filed by Mr.Bhausaheb Joti Patil, Additional Collector and Competent Authority, Thane Urban Agglomeration, Thane in which affidavit it has been stated that possession of the excess land is not obtained by his office. 5. In the light of the view that the Division Bench of this Court has taken in Voltas Ltd. & ors. v/s. Additional Collector and Competent Authority (Supra) and considering the admitted position as regards possession, which is mentioned in the Affidavit of Mr.Bhausaheb Joti Patil, the above Petition is required to be allowed and 3 WRIT PETITION NO.870 OF 2008 is accordingly allowed in terms of prayer clauses (c) and (d). Rule is accordingly made absolute with parties to bear their own costs. [R.M.SAVANT, J] [P.B.MAJMUDAR, J]