THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA Writ Petition No.18620 of 2003 ORDER: Questioning the order passed by the 1st respondent in Appeal No. VSP/104/93, dated 26.5.2003 rejecting the appeal filed by the petitioners by confirming the orders of the 2nd respondent in C.C. No. 8(4)/6(1)/5719/76 and 5721/76(2), dated 26.5.2003, the petitioners filed the present writ petition. It is the case of the petitioners that their father purchased the land admeasuring an extent of Acs. 11.73 cents situated in Madhavadhara, Visakhapatnam along with some others. Petitioners state that their father and his elder brother constituted into a partnership firm by name, M/s. G.A. Naidu and Brothers. They also approached the Municipal Corporation for sanction of lay out and after obtaining the approval, they sold away the plots. Subsequently, the said partnership firm was dissolved and its assets and liabilities were distributed among the partners. It is also stated that a partition also took place among the family members, pursuant to which, the respective family members were in possession of their respective shares. However, after the enactment of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 (for short ‘the Act’), their father filed a declaration under Section 6 of the Act seeking to surrender the surplus land before the Special Officer & Competent Authority, Urban Land Ceiling, Visakhapatnam, the 2nd respondent herein, being C.C. No. 5719 of 1976. The 2nd respondent after conducting enquiry, issued a draft statement under Section 8(1) of the Act determining the petitioners’ father as a surplus land holder of an extent of Hectares 1.1149 Sq. mtrs. Assailing the said order, petitioners’ father filed an appeal before the 1st respondent and the 1st respondent allowed the said appeal and remanded the matter to the 2nd respondent for fresh enquiry. On remand, the 2nd respondent passed an order on 22.3.1993 declaring the petitioners’ father as surplus land holder of an extent of Hec. 1.1149 square meters. Challenging the said order, the matter was carried in appeal before the 1st respondent and the 1st respondent through the impugned order dated 26.5.2003 dismissed the said appeal, while confirming the order of the 2nd respondent. Hence, the petitioners filed the present writ petition. This Court while admitting the writ petition on 21.7.2006, granted interim stay, which was made absolute on 21.7.2006. A counter affidavit has been filed by the respondent wherein the respondent has admitted that the matter has proceeded upto 10(1) stage and the petitioner had ample opportunity to contest the said proceedings. At the hearing, learned Government Pleader for Urban Land Ceiling appearing on behalf of the respondent has specifically stated that the respondent has not taken possession of the land of the petitioners so far and in view of the repealing of the Act, all the proceedings get abated. In view of the submission of the learned Government Pleader for Urban Land Ceiling and in view of the averments made in the counter affidavit, no further orders are necessary in this writ petition. The writ petition is accordingly closed. No costs. ___________________ N.V. RAMANA, J. Date:26.8.2010 pnb