1 WP No.3642.10 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY. CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION. WRIT PETITION NO. 3642 OF 2010. Akbar Haji Suleman & Anr. ........ .... .Petitioners. V/s The State of Maharashtra & Anr. ....... .... Respondents. Mr.M.S.Karnik, Adv. For the petitioners. Mr.S.R.Nargolokar, Govt. Pleader for the State. CORAM: D.D.SINHA AND MRS.MRIDULLA BHATKAR, JJ. 13th July, 2010. PC: Heard learned counsel for the respective parties. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that following facts are not disputed by the respondent. 2. In the instant case notification under section 10(1) was published in the official gazette on 29.3.2001 pertaining to land in question. Notification under section 10(3) was published on 23.1.2003 and notice under section 10(5) was issued to the petitioner (land holder) on 17.2.2005 directing him to hand over the possession of the excess land in question within 30 days. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the possession of the land in question was with the petitioner when the repealing act came into force on 29.11.2007. The petitioner continues to hold possession of the land in question thereafter till today. Learned counsel for the petitioner therefore contended that in view of the law 2 WP No.3642.10 laid down by this Court in the case of Voltas Ltd. Vs. Addl. Collector & Competent Authority, Thane, (Writ Petition No.8356 of 2006 decided on 25.7.2008) the proceedings initiated by the Competent Authority under the Urban Land (Ceiling & Regulation) Act including the notification issued stood abetted. 4. Learned assistant government pleader does not dispute the factual legal aspect of the matter including the fact that the possession of the excess land in question is with the petitioner. 5. We have considered the rival contentions of both the parties. The above referred facts are not disputed by the respondent which is evident from the affidavit dated 28.6.2010 filed by the Additional Collector. It is in these circumstances that the issue stands covered by the decision in Voltas’s case (supra) and therefore the notifications issued under sections 10(3) and 10(5) stood abated and the proceedings initiated under the Urban Land (Ceiling & Regulation) Act in respect of land in question stood nullified. 6. Writ petition stands disposed of accordingly. (D.D.SINHA, J.) (MRS.MRIDULA BHATKAR, J .)