AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Anil Kumar, J.—We have heard counsel for the petitioner and standing counsel for the respondents.
The land of the petitioner/petitioner''s predecessor was declared as surplus land under the Urban Ceiling Act. This Act has been repealed. According to the petitioner, he is still in actual possession over the land declared as surplus land and as such possession can not be taken from him. He further submits that even if possession is taken from him on paper, it should be restored to him as no compensation has been paid to him and in any case he is willing to refund the amount.
It is not disputed that the Act has been repealed and further action can only be taken in accordance with the repealing Act.
In the circumstances of the case, the petitioner may file a representation before respondent no. 3 within a month. In case any such representation is filed, it may be decided by respondent no. 3 by a speaking order, if possible, within three months from the date of receipt of the representation. The petitioner will file a certified copy of this order; other necessary documents and a duly stamped selfaddressed envelope along with his representation. Respondent no. 3 after taking decision will communicate the same to the petitioner. Till the disposal of the petitioners'' representation the parties shall maintain status quo.
With these directions the writ petition is disposed of.