1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 8042 OF 2009 1) Shri Nishikant @ Tukaram Manikrao ) Kshirsagar ) 2) Shri Avinash Raju Shinde ) Both through their Power of Attorney ) Holder Shri Jitendra Vithal Belke, ) Adult, Indian Inhabitant, residing at ) Survey No.140/5,Sadashiv Apartment, ) Kothrud, Pune 411 038. ) ..Petitioners Versus 1. Additional Collector and Competent ) Authority, Urban Land Ceilig Act, ) Pune having his office at PMT Building ) Swargate, shankarseth Road, Pune 411 037 ) 2. The Tahsildar, Haveli,Dist. Pune. ) 3. The State of Maharashtra ) ..Respondents Mr. R.D.Soni, i/b. M/s. Ram & Co., Advocates, for the petitioners. Mr. S.N.Bhosale, AGP, for the respondents. CORAM: F.I.REBELLO AND J.H.BHATIA, JJ. DATE : 26th November, 2009. JUDGMENT: (PER J.H.BHATIA,J.) 1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. With consent of the learned 2 Counsel for the parties, the petition is taken up for final hearing immediately. 2. Land survey No.164 situated at Kothrud, belonging to the petitioners, was declared surplus under the Urban Land (Ceiling & Regulation) Act, 1976 (for short, “the Ceiling Act”) and the notification under Section 10(3) of the Ceiling Act was issued on 5.1.2007. According to the petitioners, in view of the repeal of the Ceiling Act, the said notification is liable to be set aside and no further action can be taken by the Government. 3. On behalf of the State, an affidavit in reply has been filed by Mr. Bhanudas Pandurang Gaikwad, Deputy Collector and Competent Authority, who confirmed that inspite of the notification, possession of the land is still with the petitioners. 4. It is now settled in Voltas Ltd. and Anr. vs. Additional Collector & Competent Authority 2008 (5) Bom.C.R.746 that if possession of the land is not taken under the Ceiling Act, all legal proceedings in respect of any order made or purported to be made under the Ceiling Act pending immediately before the commencement of the Repealing Act before any Court, Tribunal or other authority shall abate in view of Section 4 of the Repealing Act which came into force on 3 29.11.2007 in the State of Maharashtra. As in the present case, possession of the land has not been taken prior to the enforcement of the Repealing Act, further proceedings for acquisition or taking possession of the land have to abate under Section 4 of the Repealing Act. 5. For the aforesaid reasons, the Petition is allowed and it is hereby declared that further proceedings for taking possession for acquisition of the land stand abated. No order as to costs. (J.H.BHATIA,J.) (F.I.REBELLO,J.)