1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.2155 OF 2008 Mrs.Deena Pramod Baldota. ...Petitioner vs. 1.The Addl.Collector & Competent Authority & ors. ...Respondents. --- Mr.S.S.Shah, for Petitioner. Mr.N.S.Gokhale, AGP for Respondents. CORAM: D.K.DESHMUKH & K.K.TATED, JJ. DATED: 21st November,2009 P.C.:- 1. Rule returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of parties. The subject matter of this petition is land bearing Survey no.21 of Village Kurar, Taluka Borivali. The petitioner claims to be the owner of that land and respondent nos.3A to 5 claim to be the tenants. Both the landlord-petitioner 2 and the tenants have filed Returns under the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act in relation to land bearing Survey no.21. An order under Section 8 of the Act on the Returns filed by the tenants was passed on 29.5.2006 by the Competent Authority under the ULC Act and the land admeasuring 39766 sq.mtrs. was declared as surplus from Survey no.21. Against this order, both the petitioner-landlord and the tenants filed appeals before the Additional Commissioner. The appeal of the petitioner was registered as Appeal/Desk/ULC/361/06 and the appeal of the tenants was registered as Appeal/Desk/ULC/70/07. During the pendency of these appeals, the Returns filed by the petitioner was taken up for scrutiny and order under Section 8 of the Act was made on 25.7.2007 holding that the land under Survey no.21 does not amount to vacant land and further holding that there is no surplus land held by the petitioner. The appeals filed by the landlord and the tenants against order dated 29.5.2006 have been decided by the Additional Commissioner by his Order dated 28.11.2007. The Appellate Authority on finding that the same Competent Authority has made two 3 contradictory orders in relation to the same land viz. Survey no.21, has set aside both the orders viz. Order dated 29.5.2006 as also order dated 25.7.2007. 2. The first submission of the learned Counsel appearing for petitioner is that the Appellate Authority has no jurisdiction to set aside the order dated 25.7.2007 because there was no appeal preferred by anybody against that order nor any revisional proceedings were initiated against that order, therefore, the order of the Appellate Authority setting aside the order dated 25.7.2007 is without any authority of law. He further submits that even assuming that the order of the Appellate Authority is right then also by that order the Competent Authority was directed to make a fresh order in relation to the Returns filed by the landlord and the tenants. That order of the Additional Commissioner is dated 28.11.2007 and on the next day by the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Repeal Act,1999, the ULC Act was repealed with effect from 29.11.2007. He submits that no further declarations under Section 8 of the 4 Act could have been made by the Competent Authority as contemplated by the Appellate Authority after 29.11.2007, and therefore, all further proceedings in relation to Survey no.21 referred to above under the ULC Act have lapsed. 3. We have heard the learned Counsel appearing for respondents. He has not been able to support the order so far as setting aside of order dated 25.7.2007 is concerned, because admittedly there is no appeal or revision filed in relation to that order before the Additional Commissioner. In our opinion, therefore, the order of the Additional Commissioner setting aside the order dated 25.7.2007 so far as it relates to Survey no.21, could not have been set aside by the Additional Commissioner. We also find that the learned Counsel appearing for petitioner is right in making the second submission also that due to the Urban Land (Ceiling & Regulation) Repeal Act, all further proceedings pursuant to the remand order of the Additional Commissioner have lapsed. This submission is supported by a judgment of a Division Bench of this 5 Court in the case Voltas Ltd. Vs. Additional Collector & Competent Authority, & others, 2008(5) Bom.C.R. 746 . In the result, therefore, the petition succeeds and is allowed. Rule is made absolute in terms of prayer clause (b). It is also declared that all further proceedings in relation to Survey no.21 under the Act have lapsed in view of the provisions of the Urban Land (Ceiling & Regulation) Repeal Act. Rule is made absolute accordingly. No order as to costs. (D.K.DESHMUKH, J.) (K.K.TATED, J.)