Bombay High Court Considers Legality of Orders under Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 and Applicability of Repeal Act, 1999. Petition Seeks Quashing of Settlement, Notification, and Possession Orders Based on Erroneous Computation of Excess Land and Abatement of Proceedings.

Writ petition under Article 226 challenging orders under the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 and seeking reliefs related to computation of excess vacant land, exemption schemes, and effect of Repeal Act.

The Petitioners sought quashing of settlement order dated 30 November 2004, vesting notification dated 3 March 2005, possession notice dated 7 April 2005, and government order dated 28 August 2006; directions to allow implementation of scheme under Section 20(1)(a) settled on 7 November 1990; alternatively recomputation of excess land and fresh scheme; and restoration of surrendered land admeasuring 22,835.75 sq. mtrs.

The Petitioners alleged erroneous computation of excess vacant land, failure to consider subsequent development restrictions rendering land non-buildable, and issuance of possession notice without proper opportunity, and claimed that the proceedings abated upon the adoption of the Repeal Act.

1. Order dated 30 April 1984 under Section 8(4) declared 93,622.01 sq. mtrs. excess. 2. Orders under Section 20(1)(a) dated 10 March 1988 and 7 November 1990 exempting lands and modifying scheme. 3. Surrender of 22,835.375 sq. mtrs. on 6 January 1994. 4. Revised order under Section 8(4) dated 30 November 2004 declaring 69,356.394 sq. mtrs. excess. 5. Vesting notification dated 3 March 2005 under Section 10(3). 6. Possession notice dated 7 April 2005 under Section 10(5). 7. State Government order dated 28 August 2006 under Section 34 partially upholding the competent authority's order but setting aside proceedings for 19,023.23 sq. mtrs. and directing a fresh scheme. 8. High Court order dated 11 April 2007 allowing the petition and remanding for fresh computation. 9. Supreme Court order dated 5 May 2008 in Civil Appeal No. 3227 of 2008 setting aside the High Court order and remanding for fresh consideration after impleading Thane Municipal Corporation and MHADA.

Whether the proceedings under the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 abate upon adoption of the Repeal Act, 1999 by Maharashtra. Whether the possession of excess vacant land was validly taken and handed over, thereby saving the action under the Repeal Act. Whether the computation of excess vacant land by the competent authority was lawful and in accordance with the directions of the Supreme Court and earlier orders. Whether the exemptions and schemes under Section 20 are still enforceable post-repeal.

Petitioners argued that the computation of excess land was erroneous, no effective opportunity was given before issuance of the vesting notification and possession notice, subsequent development restrictions rendered parts of the land non-buildable, and the proceedings under the Principal Act abated upon adoption of the Repeal Act as no valid possession was taken. Respondents 1-3 contended that the earlier High Court order having been set aside by the Supreme Court, the original orders of the competent authority and State Government stood restored and were enforceable; possession of the excess vacant land was taken on 15 April 2005 and handed over to the Corporation on 30 May 2005, thus the action was saved under the Repeal Act; and the petitioners themselves applied for and obtained an exemption order on 28 February 2007 in respect of part of the land, thereby they cannot challenge the earlier orders. Respondent 4 (Thane Municipal Corporation) asserted that delivery of possession of 50,333.07 sq. mtrs. was evidenced by a possession receipt dated 30 May 2005, and it had thereafter taken steps for development of the land reserved for Thane Municipal Transport.

Though, the lis has a chequered history, spanning for over 30 years, yet, the essential background facts can be summarised as under: It is evident that in view of the legislative intervention, in the form of the Repeal Act, 1999, and its adoption by the State Government with effect from 29 th November, 2007, the subject matter of the petition, which was initially legality and justifiability of the action under the provisions of the Principal Act, catapulted into validity of the actions thereunder and sustainability of the proceedings itself under the Principal Act, also. The impugned order of the High Court is, accordingly, set aside. The matter is remanded to the High Court to dispose of the issues after considering the counter filed by the appellant.

Petitioner company held lands in Thane urban agglomeration when the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 came into force. It filed a return under Section 6. On 30 April 1984, the competent authority passed an order under Section 8(4) declaring 93,622.01 sq. mtrs. as excess land. On 10 March 1988, a scheme under Section 20(1)(a) was sanctioned exempting 93,522.61 sq. mtrs. for providing housing. On 7 November 1990, a modified scheme exempted 74,906.127 sq. mtrs. and directed surrender of 22,835.375 sq. mtrs. to the Government free of cost. The petitioners surrendered that land on 6 January 1994. Subsequent development control regulations and the sanction of the Thane Municipal Corporation Development Plan on 28 April 1995 rendered several parcels non-buildable. A fresh order under Section 8(4) was passed, later revised on 30 November 2004, declaring 69,356.394 sq. mtrs. as excess vacant land. On 3 March 2005, a vesting notification under Section 10(3) was issued, followed by a possession notice under Section 10(5) on 7 April 2005. According to respondents, possession was taken on 15 April 2005 and 50,333.07 sq. mtrs. was handed over to Thane Municipal Corporation on 30 May 2005. The petitioners preferred a revision under Section 34 to the State Government. By order dated 28 August 2006, the Government upheld the excess land computation but quashed the proceedings in respect of 19,023.23 sq. mtrs. in a residential zone, directing a scheme under Section 20 for that area. The petitioners then applied for exemption for that area, and on 28 February 2007, an exemption order was passed for 13,264.87 sq. mtrs. The writ petition was filed in 2007. On 11 April 2007, the High Court allowed the petition and remanded for fresh computation. The State appealed to the Supreme Court. On 3 August 2007, the Supreme Court ordered status quo. By order dated 5 May 2008 in Civil Appeal No. 3227 of 2008, the Supreme Court set aside the High Court order and remanded the matter for fresh disposal after impleading Thane Municipal Corporation and MHADA. On 29 November 2007, the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Repeal Act, 1999 was adopted in Maharashtra, repealing the Principal Act. The High Court heard the matter with the impleaded parties and reserved judgment on 16 January 2019, pronouncing it on 13 February 2019.

• Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976: Section 6, Section 8(4), Section 10(3), Section 10(5), Section 20(1)(a), Section 34
• Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Repeal Act, 1999:
• Constitution of India: Article 226, Article 252
• Indian Companies Act, 1956: