1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.6795/2008 Kaluram Ekanath Galande Petitioner VS. The Additional Collector & Competent Authority & Ors. Respondents Mr.M.S.Karnik i/b Mr.A.G.Damle for petitioner Mr.C.R.Sonawane ,AGP for State CORAM: J.N.PATEL & MRS.MRIDULA BHATKAR,JJ. DATE : 17th June, 2009 P.C.(Mrs.Mridula Bhatkar,J.) . Rule. 2] Rule returnable forthwith and heard finally by consent. 3] This petition is filed to challenge the notice dated 10/9/2007 issued under section 10(5) of The Urban Land (Ceiling & Regulation)Act,1976 by the Competent Authority i.e.respondent no.1so also for quashing and setting aside the order dated 18/10/1996passed by the Additional Collector and the Competent Authority ,Pune under 2 the Urban Land (Ceiling & Regulation)Act,1976 .The Petitioner was holding the land at village Vadgaon Sheri,Pune and after the scrutiny of the statement filed by the petitioner under the Urban Land (Ceiling & Regulation)Act,1976 the respondents declared the portion of the vacant land as surplus and was liable for acquisition under the provisions of The Urban Land (Ceiling & Regulation)Act,1976. The petitioner challenged the decision of the Competent Authority as he was declared to be the surplus holder to the extent of 2205 sq.mtrs. Of land. The Competent Authority issued notice dated 10/9/2007 under section 10(5) of the Urban Land (Ceiling & Regulation)Act,1976 to hand over the possession. However,the respondents did not take the actual physical possession of the land from the petitioner till the Urban Land (Ceiling & Regulation)Act,1976 was repealed on 29/11/2007. Hence this petition. 5] The respondents have filed affidavit in reply in which it is agreed that the possession of the land was not taken by the respondents and it is with the petitioner. 6] The Urban Land (Ceiling & Regulation)Act,1976 was repealed on 29/11/2007 and so the proceedings under the said Act are abated since the said date.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 possession pursuant to the notification under section 10(3) of 3 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,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. 7] 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. 8] The petition will therefore have to be allowed in terms of prayer clause (b) and (c) which read as follows. 4 (b) “this Hon’ble Court be pleased to quash and set aside the impugned order dated 18/10/1996 passed by the Additional Collector & Competent Authority, Pune,Urban Agglomeration, Pune.“ (c) “this Hon’ble Court be pleased to quash and set aside the Notice dated 10/9/2007 under section 10 (5) of the U.L.(C.& R.)Act, 1976 issued by the Respondent no.1.” Rule made absolute with no order as to costs. (J.N.Patel) (Mrs.Mridula Bhatkar,J.) SRS