KAMLESH Vs. STATE OF U.P.AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned Counsel for the Petitioner and Sri Sanjay Goswami, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel appearing for the State Respondents.

(2.) Certain land of the Petitioner was declared as surplus vacant land under the provisions of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). Against the said order declaring surplus, the Petitioner or the predecessor in interest had filed an appeal which was dismissed, against which a writ petition was filed before this Court, registered as Writ Petition No. 12675 of 2000. In the meantime the Act was repealed vide Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Repeal Act, 1999 (hereinafter referred to as the Repeal Act). The said writ petition was disposed of by a Division Bench of this Court vide order dated 10.3.2004, which is reproduced herein below:

(3.) From a perusal of the said order it is apparent that it was passed taking into consideration the effect of the Repeal Act. The Division Bench of this Court had abated the proceedings under the Act. The second part of the order was with regard to the protection of the Petitioner's possession. It further provided that the orders passed by the Respondents in the said writ petition i.e. the appellate authority and the competent authority would not have any effect. The net result of the said order of the Division Bench would be that the orders declaring the land as surplus would not have any effect and the land would stand restored to the land holder i.e. the Petitioner.