No proceedings can beinitiated under a repealed enactment.

(Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Declaration as stated therein.)

This Writ Petition has been filed praying for the issuance of a Writ of declaration, declaring that the the proceedings initiated under the Tamil Nadu Urban Land (Ceiling & Regulation) Act, 1978, in R.C.No.254/87A, dated 31.08.1989, read with Rc.No.5633/93A, dated 25.02.1994, by the 1st respondent has abated on the promulgation of Act 20 of 1999 and consequently, the petitioner is the owner of the property situated in No.144, Seevaram Village, Saidapet Taluk, comprised in Survey No.51/1B1.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as for the respondents.

3. It is the case of the petitioner that she had purchased the land measuring one acre, under a document registered at the office of the Sub-Registrar, Saidapet, as document No.780/70. The property is situated at No.144, Seevaram Village, Saidapet Taluk, comprised in part of Survey No.51/1B1. The petitioner further submits that proceedings were initiated by the first respondent herein for acquisition of land to the extent of 3570 sq.metres as the land was said to be surplus since it was in excess of the ceiling limit prescribed by the Tamil Nadu Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1978, (hereinafter referred to as the Act), as per proceedings of the first respondent, dated 10.11.1987. A statement was issued to the petitioner under Section 9 of said Act in which an area of 3570 sq.metres was determined to be the extent of vacant land held by the petitioner in excess of the ceiling limit. The petitioner had sent her objections on 05.12.1987 stating that she had retired from the partnership firm viz., M/s. A.R.C Engineering works on 01.04.1981 and no share of the property was allotted to her. Therefore, she was not concerned with the area of 2023 sq.metres said to be in excess of the ceiling limit since only an area of 1547 sq.meters belonged to her.

4. The proceedings before the competent Urban Land Ceiling authority resulted in a notice, dated 30.08.1994, asking the petitioner to appear on 16.09.1994 to file her objections for the proposed determination of the amount payable under Section 12(6) of the Act. Inspite of the objections sent by her, on 05.12.1987, that she is not concerned with 2023 Sq.meters belonging to M/s. A.R.C. Engineering Works and that only 1547 Sq.meters belonged to her, the above mentioned notice, dated 30.08.1994, was issued showing that an area of 3550 Sq. metres as being in excess of the ceiling limit prescribed under the Act. Therefore, the petitioner had submitted her objections by her communication, dated 16.09.1994, after which no further action was initiated by the respondents.

5. It is also the case of the petitioner that the Tamil Nadu Urban Land (Ceiling & Regulation) Repeal Act, 20 of 1999, was promulgated by which all proceedings seeking to acquire the excess lands were deemed to have abated and therefore, the petitioner continues to be the owner of the land and the land ceiling authorities do not have a lien over the property. The petitioner has also stated that after the notice, dated 30.08.1994, neither the physical possession of the property had been taken by the respondents nor the petitioner had been paid due compensation. The petitioner would emphasise that any statutory vesting under Section 11 (3) of the Act is of no relevance when no compensation has been paid to her. Moreover, physical possession has also not been taken by the competent authorities to dis-entitle the petitioner from claiming her rights over the property. Moreover, the proceedings initiated under the Act is deemed to be pending without having been completed and after the promulgation of Act 20 of 1999, all pending proceedings under the Act would have to be considered as abated.

6. In such circumstances, the petitioner had made representations to the respondents requesting them to pass necessary orders to the effect th