1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.8439/2008 Indubai Shalik Patil Petitioner Vs. The Additional Collector & Competent Authority & Ors. Respondents Mr.Jayesh Mhatre i/b Mr.S.G.Karandikar for petitioner Ms.M.P.Thakur,AGP for State Coram :J.N.Patel & Mrs.Mridula Bhatkar,JJ. Date :26th June,2009 P.C.(Mrs.Mridula Bhatkar,J.) . Rule. 2] Rule returnable forthwith and heard finally by consent . 3] The petitioner has filed this petition for removing the name of the State of Maharashtra which is appearing in the 7/12 extract of the suit land and for declaration that the State is not entitled to subject the lands involved in the present petition any further to the provisions of U.L.(C & R)Act,1976 and that proceeding under section 10 of the said Act stands abated due to repeal of the said Act. Petitioner’s land admeasuring 4760.83 meters ,from S.Nos. 2 14/9,14/2,10/7, 10/6, 8/3, 8/18, and 8/19 situates in village Kavesar, District-Thane was declared as surplus by respondent no.1 by issuing notification u/s 10(3) the Urban Land (Ceiling & Regulation)l Act,1976 dated 18/2/2000 . It is contended that yet the possession of the land is not taken by the respondents. 4] The respondents have filed affidavit in reply opposing the petition in which it is contended that after issuance of notice in respect of surplus land after stipulated period of 30 days Talathi Kavesasr has taken the mutation entry at Sr.no. 2152 on 10/5/2005 and was certified by the Tahasildar.It is however,agreed that the possession of the land was not taken by the respondents and it is with the petitioner. 5] The Urban Land (Ceiling & Regulation)Act,1976 was repealed on 29/11/2007 and so the proceedings under the said Act are abated since the said date. In the present matter the Government has not taken any steps under section 10(3) of the said Act. Thus,the case of the petitioner is covered under the decision of the Supreme Court Mukarram Ali Khan Vs. State of U.P.& Ors.,AIR, 2007,Hon’ble Supreme Court, 3 6282; in which it is held as follows 5]Section-4 of the Repeal Act reads as follows : 4.Abatement of legal proceedings- All legal proceedings relating to any order made or purported to be made under the Principal Act pending immediately before the commencement of this Act ,before any Court, tribunal or other authority shall abate; Provided that this section shall not apply to the proceedings relating to Sections 11,12,13 and 14 of the principal Act insofar as such proceedings are relatable to the land,possession of which has been taken over by the State Government or any person duly authorised by the State Government in this behalf or by the competent authority. 6] In view of the affidavit filed by the appellant to which no objection has been filed,undisputed position is that the State has not taken the possession over the surplus land.Therefore,the proceedings have to be treated to have abated under Section 4 of the Repeal Act. 6] Further reliance is placed on Voltas and Others Vs.Additional Collector & Competent Authority ,2008(5) Bom.C.R.746 and the SLP preferred against this decision was dismissed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. 7] The petition will therefore have to be allowed in terms of prayer clause(b),& (c) and (d) which read as follows. [b] By issuing necessary writ/direction/order, the 4 Tahasildar,Thane respondent no.3 be directed to remove the name of the State of Maharashtra which is appearing in the 7/12 extract of the suit land. [c] It be declared that the State is not entitled to subject the lands involved in the present petition any further to the provisions of Urban land (Ceiling & Regulation) Act , 1976. [d] The proceeding under section 10 of the ULC Act, 1976 be declared as abated. Rule made absolute with no order as to costs. (J.N.Patel,J.) (Mrs.Mridula Bhatkar,J.) SRS