1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.4836/2010 Ekanath B.Patil ..Petitioner versus The State of Maharashtra & Ors. ..Respondents Mr.D.S.Mhaispurkar for Petitioner. Mr.S.N.Patil,AGP for – Respondent No. 1 to 3 CORAM : D. D. SINHA AND MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR, JJ. DATED : JULY, 6, 2010. P.C. : . Heard counsel for the petitioner and respondents. It is submitted that the competent authority under the Urban Land (Ceiling & Regulation) Act 1976 (U.L.(C. & R.) Act initiated proceedings by issuing notification under sections 10(1), 10(3) and 10(5) of the said Act in respect of the land in question. It is contended that after the Repeal Act came into force on 29/11/2007 the proceedings initiated under the U.L.(C & R ) Act stands 2 abated if the possession of the land in question is with the land owner on the date the Repeal Act came into force and thereafter. It is submitted that the controversy in issue is covered by the decision of this Court in Voltas case. It is,therefore, prayed that the petition may be allowed in terms of prayer clauses of the petition. 2. A.G.P.has not disputed that the total land in question is 39,710.00 sq.mtrs.which was declared surplus from survey no.80/12 , 72 pt., 61/7 pt. 68/3, 68/4, 79/3 pt., 74 pt.of village Aasde ,Golavli ,Tal.Kalyan,Dist.Thane. It is submitted that the physical possession of the said land was never taken by the authority and it is with the petitioner. 3. In view of the above referred facts coupled with the law declared by this Court in Voltas case the notification issued by the competent authority under section 10(1), 3 10(3) and 10(5) of the U.L.(C & R )Act stands abated and the action taken under the U.L.(C & R )Act by the competent authority in respect of the land in question stands nullified . Petition is disposed of accordingly. (D. D. SINHA, J.) (MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR,J.)