- (1.) PETITIONERS are the sons of late Natthi Lal, who died on 22.10.2012. Petitioners allege that their father was in actual cultivatory possession over Khasra No. 121 (m) and that after his death, petitioners have succeeded him and are cultivating the land in question.
(2.) THE petitioners have challenged the order dated 31.3.1981, whereby the competent authority, in the absence of an objection, proceeded to finalise the draft statement under Section 8(4) of the Act. Further prayer has been made to command the respondents to mutate the name of the petitioners after deleting the entry of 'State' in revenue records in respect of the land declared as surplus. However, during the course of hearing the present writ petition, learned counsel for the petitioners, by referring to the pleadings made in the writ petition, has submitted that by virtue of the provisions of the Urban Land ( Ceiling and Regulation) Repeal Act, 1999 the ceiling proceedings have stood abated and consequently, the petitioners are entitled to retain their possession over the land and are also entitled to a direction for restoration of their names in the revenue records.
(3.) WE have heard Sri Arunesh Singh, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent State. The case of the petitioners is that though the land of the petitioners was declared as surplus under the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 (in short hereinafter referred to as 'Act') but actual physical possession has not been taken and thus they would be entitled to the benefit of sub -section (3) of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Repeal Act, 1999 (in short hereinafter referred to as 'Repeal Act').;