S.N. Srivastava, J. - (1.) THIS writ petition is directed against the orders dated 6.8.1984 and 4.7.2000 passed by prescribed authority and appellate authority, respectively arising out of proceedings under Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976.
(2.) HEARD learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned standing counsel. Learned Counsel for the petitioner on the strength of paragraph 12 of the writ petition urged that possession of petitioner on the land in dispute was not taken by authority concerned on the basis of order passed by prescribed authority. He urged that Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 has already been repealed by the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Repeal Act, 1999, the petitioner is entitled to get benefit by retaining possession of land in dispute under Section 3 of Act No. 15 of 1999. Learned Counsel for the petitioner relied upon a Division Bench judgment of this Court in Chabi Nath v. State of U.P. and Ors. , in support of his case.
(3.) SRI Bhola Nath Yadav, learned standing counsel in opposition urged that in view of averments made in paragraph 8 of the counter -affidavit possession was already taken from petitioner and the land vests in State of U.P. It is further stated possession was handed over to Saharanpur Development Authority. Learned standing counsel for Saharanpur Development Authority also urged that petitioner is not entitled to get any relief in the writ petition and writ petition is liable to be dismissed.;