1 WP 2970 of 2008 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.2970 of 2008 Sir Dwarkanath Durgadas Dev Memorial Education and Cultural Trust ..... Petitioner V/s. The Additional Collector and Competent Authority and Ors. ..... Respondents Mr.K.K.Malpathak, for the petitioner. Mr.V.S.Gokhale, AGP, for the respondent State. CORAM :P.B.MAJMUDAR & R.M.SAVANT, JJ. DATE : 21st July, 2010 P.C. 1. Rule. 2. Learned AGP waives service of rule on behalf of the respondents. With the consent of the parties, rule is made returnable forthwith and heard. 3. One Mr.Kashinath Gotiram Chaudhary and others were the owners of land bearing Survey No.117/1 of Village Kausa, Dist. Thane. On the demise of said Kashinath G. Choudhary, his daughter Smt.Venubai Budhaji Patil and others, became owners and possessors of the said land by virtue of the Indian Succession Act. The petitioners who are the owners of adjoining land bearing Survey No.117/2 and 136/2 and 3, have 2 WP 2970 of 2008 entered into a Development Agreement, which was registered with the Sub Registrar, Thane, on 31-03-2006, by which the petitioners have been given permanent rights for development of the said land along with an Irrevocable power of attorney. The petitioners on the Urban Land (C & R) Act, coming into force, filed a Return under Section 8(1) of the Act, on 20-04-2006 before the Deputy Collector and Competent Authority. The filing of the return resulted in a order under Section 8(4) of the said Act, on 08-01-2007. By the said order, an area admeasuring 3,650 sq. mtrs., from lands bearing Survey No.117/1 and 2 and Survey Nos.136/2 and 3 was declared as surplus land. 4. It appears that thereafter, a Notification under Section 10(1) of the Act, came to be issued on 14-06-2007, which was followed by a Notification under Section 10(3) dated 24-07-2007. It is irrefutable that no scheme was ultimately sanctioned by the State Government in respect of the area declared as surplus, since the petitioner did not submit any such scheme under Section 20 of the Act.. 5. The question which arises for consideration is as to whether the petitioners would be entitled to be benefit of the repeal of the U.L. (C & R) Act, which came into force in the State of Maharashtra from 29-11-2007. 6. On behalf of the respondents, pursuant to the directions 3 WP 2970 of 2008 issued by this Court, an additional affidavit-in-reply has been filed, by Mr.Bhausaheb Joti Patil, Additiional Collector and Competent Authority, Thane Urban Agglomeration, Thane. In the said affidavit, a categorical statement has been made that the actual and physical possession of the land was not taken by the respondents pursuant to the notice issued under Section 10(3) of the Act. Considering the said factual position and in view of the law laid down by this Court in the case of Voltas Ltd., and another V/s. Additional Collector and Competent Authority and Ors., 2008(5) Bom.C.R. 746, the above petition is required to be allowed and is accordingly allowed in terms of prayer clauses (a) and (b). Rule is accordingly made absolute, with parties to bear their own costs. ( R.M.SAVANT, J. ) ( P.B.MAJMUDAR, J. )