Sudhir Agarwal, J. - (1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
(2.) The sole petitioner Lalji Son of late Sunder has filed this writ petition under Article 226 of Constitution of India seeking a mandamus commanding respondents not to interfere in physical possession of petitioner over part of Plot No. 207 area i.e. 723.46 Sq.M. and Plot No.134 Mi area 988.38 Sq.M., Plot No.205/2Mi area 152.05 Sq. M., Plot No.548/4 area 323.13 Sq.M., Plot No.565 area 76.03 Sq.M., Plot No.643/1 area 114.04 Sq.M., total 1653.63, 1/2 of 1653.63 = 826.82 + 723.46 = 1550.68 Sq.M.; part of Plot No.127 i.e. 507.17 Sq.M., Plot No.134 Mi. Area 988.38 Sq.M., Plot No.205/2 Mi area 152.05 Sq.M., Plot No.548/4 area 323.13 sq.M., Plot No.565/2 area 76.03 Sq.M. and Plot No.643/1 area 114.04 Sq.M. total 1653.63, half of 1653.63 i.e. 826.82 Total 1333.99 Sq.M.(826.82 + 507.17); and Plot No.209 area 262.17 Sq.M., Plot No.143 area 62.72 Sq.M., Plot No.141 area 575.92 Sq.M. and One-third of Plot No.134 area 1482.56 Sq.M., Plot No.205/2 area 223.09 Sq.M., Plot No.548 area 779.30 Sq.M., Plot No.548/2 area 133.05 Sq.M., Plot No.548/3 area 114.04 Sq.M., Plot No.565 area 114.04 Sq.M. total 2851.08 (One third of 2851.08 i.e. 950.36 Total 1851.17 Sq.M. (262.17 + 62.72 + 575.92 + 950.36) situated in Mauza Mavaiya, Pargana-Arail, Tahsil Karchhana, District Allahabad since actual physical possession of aforesaid land was not taken by respondents despite declaration of land surplus under the provisions of Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 (hereinafter referred to as the "Act, 1976") and proceedings had abated after enactment of Urban Land (Ceiling & Regulation) Repeal Act, 1999 (hereinafter referred to as the "Repeal Act, 1999").
(3.) The facts in brief as stated in the writ petition are that petitioner is owner of land in dispute situated in village Mavaiya, Pargana - Arail, Tehsil Karchhana, District Allahabad. Proceedings under Act, 1976 were initiated by Competent Authority, Urban Ceiling, Varanasi by issuing notice under Section 8(3) of Act, 1976 and thereafter an order was passed under Section 8(4) of Act, 1976 on 26.11.1984 declaring total 1550.68 Sq.M., 1333.99 Sq.M. and 1851.17 Sq.M. of land, surplus. No compensation was paid to petitioner. A notice under Section 10(5) of Act, 1976 was issued, but actual physical possession was not taken by respondents and it continued with petitioner after enforcement of Repeal Act, 1999. Thus, by virtue of Section 3 of Repeal Act, 1999, ceiling proceedings stood abated and thereafter respondents had no authority to interfere with possession of petitioner over land in dispute.;