- (1.) Heard Sri Arvind Srivastava, learned counsel for petitioners and learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for respondents.
(2.) Petitioners, claiming benefit of Urban Land (Ceiling & Regulation) Repeal Act, 1999 (hereinafter referred to as the "Repeal Act, 1999"), have filed present writ petition stating that "actual physical possession" of land in dispute was not taken till enactment of Act, 1999, therefore, proceedings initiated under Section 6(1) of Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 (hereinafter referred to as the "Act, 1976") have abated and now petitioners cannot be dispossessed from land in dispute which is still in their possession.
(3.) The case set up by petitioners who are three real brothers, sons of Rafiuddin, is, that land, i.e., Plot No. 384M, Khata No. 287 situated in village Dhakka, Pargana, Tehsil and District Moradabad was recorded in the name of their father, Rafiuddin in Revenue record. Proceedings under Act, 1976 were initiated by Competent Authority and vide order dated 17.04.1989, passed under Section 8(4) read with Section 9 of Act, 1976, 1632.19 sq. meter of land was declared surplus. Mutation in Revenue record by removing name of petitioners' father and entering name of State Government was also given effect to. Petitioners, however, claimed that they continued in "actual physical possession" over land in dispute and it was never taken by respondents. In 1999, Repeal Act, 1999 enacted, was adopted in State of U.P. on 18.03.1999 and on that date petitioners, were in possession of land in dispute hence entire proceedings under Act, 1976 stood abated. Reliance is place on a Supreme Court's judgment in State of U.P. Vs. Hari Ram, 2013 4 SCC 280.;