AMBAJI NARSING MALI Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have challenged the order dated 1272006 passed by respondent No.1 under Section 34 of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act). By aforesaid order the allotment of surplus land in favour of respondent No.6 has been maintained and the request made by the petitioners for undertaking a housing scheme under Section 20 of the said Act has been refused. By amending the petition on 722014, the petitioners have also challenged notice dated 25111983 issued under Section 10(5) of the said Act in respect of the land in question and have further sought a declaration that all proceedings initiated under the said Act stand abated.

(2.) It would be necessary to refer to certain facts that have bearing on the adjudication of this writ petition. Survey No.241/3 Part admeasuring 3461.50 square meters and Survey No.241/4 Part admeasuring 9700 square meters form subject matter of this writ petition. The petitioners were the owners of aforesaid lands. On 30111982, a notification under Section 10(1) of the said Act came to be issued declaring aforesaid land to be excess vacant land. On 1991983, on the request made by respondent No.6 Trust for allotment of excess land, the respondent No.1 directed that necessary action in that regard would be taken after completion of formalities. On 6101983, Gazette Notification was duly published under Section 10(3) of the said Act, by which aforesaid lands stood vested with the State Government with effect from 2581983. On 25111983 in terms of notice issued under Section 10(5) of the said Act, the petitioners land owners were directed to hand over possession of said land to the Competent Authority on 3121983. In aforesaid communication, the petitioners were informed that excess land was being allotted to respondent No.6 Trust. Thereafter on 3121983, possession of aforesaid land was taken in presence of Panchas. It was noted in the Kabjepatti that the land owners were not present at that time and there was no objection or complaint from any party while taking possession.

(3.) The petitioners land owners challenged notice dated 25111983 by which they had been directed to hand over possession as well as notice issued under Section 10(5) of the said Act by filing Writ Petition No.4066/1984. On 10101984, this Court issued Rule in the said writ petition and observed that as the possession was already delivered, the parties should maintain status quo as on 10101984.