ABHAYA KUMAR MEHTA Vs. STATE OF MP

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Pro Bono Publico petition has been filed by the petitioner with a prayer that the permission granted to respondent No. 3 M/s. Shri Synthetics Ltd., Ujjain, under the provisions of S. 20 (1) (a) of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 (for short 'the Act'), be cancelled/revoked and further that the sale-deed executed for and on behalf of respondent No. 3 in favour of respondent No. 4 be also cancelled. On show cause notice being issued to the respondents No. 3 and 4, they have submitted their separate replies opposing the prayer made by the petitioner. They have further categorically mentioned that the Act itself has been repealed with effect from 17.2.2000. Thus, the permission granted to respondent No. 2 under S. 20 of the Act cannot be of any use to this respondent. It was further submitted that under the saving clause of the repealing Act, orders passed under S. 20 of the Act have been saved but since the principal Act itself has been repealed, respondents No. 1 and 2 cannot take any action against respondent No. 3 for holding the land in excess to the prescribed limit and declare any land surplus. Similar is the reply of respondent No. 4.

(2.) SHRI C.L. Yadav strenuously submitted that this petition has now been rendered infructuous as in any case, after repeal of the Act, the land held surplus by respondent No. 3, being in excess of the prescribed limit, cannot be declared surplus. This position has been seriously refuted by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner.