1 IN THE HIGH COURT JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.10383 OF 2009 Shri.Anant Sakharam Mhatre. ...Petitioner vs. 1.State of Maharashtra & Ors. ...Respondents --- Mr.G.M.Savagave, for Petitioner. Mr.S.R.Nargolkar, AGP for Respondent-State. --- CORAM: D.K.DESHMUKH & A.R.JOSHI, JJ. DATED: 8TH FEBRUARY,2010 P.C.: 1. Rule returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of parties. Pursuant to the Return filed by the petitioner under the Urban Land (Ceiling & Regulation) Act, by order dated 11.4.1997 land admeasuring 17265 sq.meters was declared surplus. Thereafter, notification under sub-section (1) of Section 10 of the Act was published on 23.4.1997. Then Notification under Section 10(3) of the Act was published on 2.2.2006. Notice under Section 10(5) of the Act was given on 7.3.2006. But according to the 2 petitioner, possession of surplus land was not taken by the respondents. The fact that the actual and physical possession of the subject land is still with the petitioner, is admitted in the affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents. Thus, it is clear that on 29.11.2007 when the Urban Land (ceiling and Regulation) Act was repealed by the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Repeal Act, possession of surplus land was with the petitioner is an established position. Hence, in view of the provisions of the Repeal Act and in view of the judgment of the Division Bench in the case Voltas Ltd. Vs. The Addl.Collector & Competent Authority & ors., 2008(5) Bom.C.R. 746 , it is declared that the proceedings under the Urban Land (Ceiling & Regulation) Act in relation to the surplus land are abated. No order as to costs. (D.K.DESHMUKH, J.) (A.R.JOSHI, J.)