( 1 ) THE impugned land of the writ petitioners is, according to the respondent authority, surplus in nature and had been taken by the authority as per Sections 10 (5) and 10 (6) of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976. Such Act was repealed by virtue of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Repeal Act, 1999. State of Uttar Pradesh adopted the repealing Act of the central Government. Therefore, the repealing Act is applicable in the State with full force.

( 2 ) THE bone of contention of the petitioners argument is that the authority had not taken the actual physical possession of the land in question, therefore, the possession cannot be kept by the state Authority after the repealing Act being enforced in the State. The writ petition was filed after the repealing Act came into force.

( 3 ) THEREFORE, the moot point is whether the words actual physical possession are contemplated under the prevailing law or not. ( 4 ) ACCORDING to us, there is no such bearing under the law leaving aside the word possession. But we are constrained due to evaporation of earlier law. Therefore, the point has to be rationally thought for the necessity. Doubtful words are