( 1 ) BY means of filing this appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent, the appellants have challenged legality of judgment dated 28/08/1984 rendered by the learned Single Judge, in Special Civil Application No. 1846/84, by which validity of order of the Competent Authority and Deputy Collector, Urban Land Ceiling, Rajkot declaring 576. 50 sq. mts. of land as excess land as well as notice dated 16/12/1983 issued under section 10 (5) of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 calling upon the appellants to handover possession of excess land, are upheld.

( 2 ) THE appellant no. 1 is widow of deceased Chandrakant D. Doshi; whereas appellants no. 2 and 3 are sons of the deceased. On coming into force of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 ("the Act" for short), appellant no. 1 filed Form No. I under section 6 (1) of the Act specifying the location, extent, value etc. of lands held by her. The Competent Authority prepared a draft statement proposing to declare land admeasuring 576. 50 sq. mts. as excess land. Objections were filed against the draft statement by appellant no. 1 and after considering them, the Competent Authority passed an order declaring 576. 50 sq. mts. of land as excess land. After service of statement under section 9 of the Act on appellant no. 1, the Competent Authority caused a notification to be issued under section 10 (1) of the Act. Thereafter a notice dated 16/12/1983 was issued by the Competent Authority under section 10 (5) of the Act calling upon appellant no. 1 to hand over possession of the surplus land described therein. Thereupon Special Civil Application No. 1846/84 was filed by the appellants challenging order of the Competent Authority by which land admeasuring 576. 50 sq. mts. was declared to be excess land as well as notice issued under section 10 (5) of the Act, by which appellant no. 1 was called upon to hand over possession of the surplus land. The petition was admitted and ad-interim relief restraining the respondents from taking possession of land bearing survey No. 81/1, Plot no. 29, admeasuing 520. 25 sq. mts. situated at Raiya and land bearing survey no. 77, Plot No. 1, admeasuring 56. 25 sq. mts. situated at Nana Mava, was granted. Ultimately, the petition was rejected by the learned Single Judge vide judgment dated August 28, 1984, which has given rise to the present appeal, but ad-interim relief granted earlier was continued for a period of four weeks from the date of judgment to enable the appellants to have further recourse in accordance with law.

( 3 ) MR. D. U. Shah, learned advocate for the appellants addressed a note dated 18/11/1999 to the Registrar, High Court of Gujarat, Ahmedabad, stating that the appellants are in possession of the land declared to be excess and as the appeal has abated in terms of provisions of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Repeal Act, 1999, the appeal should be placed before the Court for appropriate orders. That is how, office has placed the appeal before us for hearing.

( 4 ) WE may state that the appeal was initially placed for admission hearing before Division Bench comprising P. S. Poti, CJ (as he then was) and A. S. Qureshi,j. and the Division Bench had issued notice making it returnable on 19/11/1984. Thereafter another Division Bench had admitted the appeal by an order dated 1/01/1987. The appellants had also filed Civil Application No. 3943/84 in Letters Patent Appeal No. 428/84 to restrain the Competent Authority and Deputy Collector, ULC, Rajkot from taking possession of land bearing Survey No. 82/1, plot no. 29, admeasuring 520-25 sq. mts. situated at Raiya and land bearing Survey No. 77, Plot No. 1, admeasuring 56. 25 sq. mts. situated at Nana Mava, pending admission and final disposal of the appeal. In Civil Application the Division Bench had issued notice making it returnable on 19/11/1984 and ad-interim relief of status-quo was granted by an order dated 24/09/1984. The order sheet indicates