1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 3344 OF 2010 Suryakant Keraba Dhangar ..Petitioner versus The State of Maharashtra & Anr. ..Respondents WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 3345 OF 2010 Sanjay Anandrao Jadhav Kasbekar ..Petitioner versus The State of Maharashtra & Anr. ..Respondents WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 3346 OF 2010 Sharad Jaysingrao Jadhav Kasbekar ..Petitioner versus The State of Maharashtra & Anr. ..Respondents WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 3347 OF 2010 Rajendra Vilasrao Jadhav Kasbekar ..Petitioner versus The State of Maharashtra & Anr. ..Respondents 2 Mr. Rahul P. Walvekar for Petitioners in all the petitions. Mrs. M. P. Thakur - AGP for State – Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 in all the petitions. CORAM : D. D. SINHA AND MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR, JJ. DATED : JULY 07, 2010. P.C. : 1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for the State. 2. Counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the respondents have initiated proceedings under the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 and necessary Notifications under Section 10(3) of the said Act were issued by the competent authority. It is contended that the Repealing Act came into existence with effect from 29th November, 2007 and at the relevant time the possession of the excess lands declared under the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act was with the petitioners. Actual possession of the said lands was never taken by the respondents and petitioners continue to be in possession of the said lands even today. It is submitted that in view of the decision of this Court in the case of Voltas Ltd. & Anr. vs. Additional Collector and Competent Authority, Thane & Ors. reported in 2008(5) ALL MR 537, the action initiated by the 3 competent authority under the provisions of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, including issuance of Notifications under Section 10(3) stands abated. 3. The learned Assistant Government Pleader does not dispute the factual and legal aspect of the matters including the fact that the possession of the excess lands is with the petitioners – land owners, till today. 4. In the back-drop of the above referred undisputed facts and in view of the law declared by this Court in Voltas Case, the proceedings initiated by the competent authority under the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act stands abated. Hence, the Notifications under Section 10(3) of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, are quashed and set aside. All the Petitions are disposed of accordingly. (D. D. SINHA, J.) (MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR,J.)