1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.3322 OF 2008 Smt.Sonubai Sitaram Bhoir. ...Petitioner vs. 1.The Deputy Collector & anr. ...Respondents. --- Mr.S.G.Karandikar, for Petitioner. Mr.A.H.Palekar, AGP for Respondents. CORAM: D.K.DESHMUKH & J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ. DATED: 25th August, 2008. P.C.:- 1. Rule returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of parties. 2. Admittedly, the land from the holding of the 2 petitioner was declared as surplus under the Urban Land (Ceiling & Regulation) Act,1976. A notification under sub-section (3) of Section 10 of the Act was issued and was published in the Government Gazette dated 19.1.2006. Thereafter, a notice under sub- section (5) of Section 10 of the Act was issued on 21.4.2006 asking the petitioner to deliver possession of the land. The petitioner has stated in the petition that the petitioner did not deliver possession pursuant to the notice dated 21.4.2006. It is further stated that the respondents also did not take any steps to take possession of the land till 29.11.2007 when the Urban Land (Ceiling & Regulation) Act was repealed by the Urban Land (Ceiling & Regulation) Repeal Act,1999. The petitioner, therefore, relying on the judgment of the Division Bench dated 25.6.2008 passed in Writ petition no. 8356 of 2006 in the case “Voltas Ltd. and another Vs. Additional Collector and Competent Authority, Thane Urban Agglomeration & others” to which one of us (D.K.Deshmukh, J.) is a party, contends that now all further proceedings have lapsed and possession of the land cannot be taken by the State Government. 3 3. We have heard the learned Assistant Government Pleader. We have perused the affidavit filed on behalf of the State Government. In paragraph 6 of the petition, there is a categorical statement made that the Government did not take possession of the land. In the affidavit filed by the State, the position has not been denied. Therefore, it appears from the record that the possession of the land which is declared as surplus was not taken by the Government. In view of the aforesaid position, this petition has to be allowed. In our opinion, the following order would meet the ends of justice:- Rule is made absolute in terms of prayer clause (c). No order as to costs. (D.K.DESHMUKH, J.) (J.P.DEVADHAR, J.)