THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.14375 of 2002 Dated:16.06.2010 Between: M.Narasimha, And others. ...Petitioners And Government of Andhra Pradesh, Rep.by its Secretary to Government, Revenue Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad, And others. ...Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.14375 of 2002 ORDER: The petitioners are legal heirs of Komaraiah. They are statedly owners of the property bearing survey No.78 Paiki admeasuring Acs.3.02 guntas situated at Shaikpet Village, Golconda Mandal in Hyderabad District. After coming into force of Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 (the Act), the petitioners herein filed declarations under Section 6 of the Act before the second respondent. The same was processed. After issuing the draft statement under Section 8(1) of the Act, a final statement was issued on 03.09.1987 and by gazette notification dated 10.09.1998 under Section 10(3) of the Act, last vested in State. A consequential notice under Section 10(5) of the Act was issued. Petitioners all along have been contending that they should be given advantage of Section 2(g)(i)(ii) of the Act and their application regarding this aspect is also pending. When the same was not considered, they filed the writ petition challenging the final statement dated 03.09.1987. This Court while admitting the writ petition on 07.08.2002 passed interim orders in W.P.M.P.No.17965 of 2002 directing that pending further orders, the petitioners shall not be dispossessed from the land in question. This Court heard the Counsel for the petitioners and Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue (Urban Land Ceiling). The Act has since been repealed by Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Repeal Act, 1999. The Government of Andhra Pradesh issued orders in G.O.Ms.No.603 giving effect to the Repeal Act with effect from 27.03.2008. As per Section 4 of the Repeal Act all proceedings relating to any order made or purported to be made under the principal Act shall abate, provided the land has not been vested and taken possession by the Government. In this case admittedly a notice under Section 10(5) of the Act was issued on 06.11.1998. Therefore, as rightly pointed out by the Counsel for the petitioners – which is not denied or disputed by the other side – the proceedings shall abate and consequential notification under Section 10(3) of the Act and notice under Section 10(5) of the Act as well as the order under Section 9 of the Act dated 03.09.1987, shall abate and they cannot be enforced. The Writ Petition stands disposed of accordingly. There shall be no order as to costs. ____________ (V.V.S.RAO, J) 16.06.2010 vs