Hon’ble Sudhir Agarwal, J.—Petitioner Rashid has sought a mandamuscommanding respondents not to interfere in peaceful possession over the land of Khasras No. 185/3 and 167 situated in village Dungrawali, Post Office Partapur, Tehsil and District Meerut.

2. Facts in brief are that petitioner’s father Late Hameed, who was tenure holder of disputed land since before 1368 Fasli, submitted a return under Section 6(1) of Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 (hereinafter referred to as ‘Act, 1976’) declaring that land held by him alongwith residential house is his residence. Hameed had only ½ share in land in question and remaining house belongs to his brother. A survey was conducted by competent authority and it issued a notice stating that total land in hand of Hameed was 10828.26 square metre and it proposed to declare 9328.26 square metre as surplus. Notice allegedly sent alongwith draft was not served on Hameed, hence he could not file any objection. Vide order dated 3.6.1981 competent authority declared 9328.26 square metre land, surplus. Actual possession over the land, however, continued with Hameed and after his death, petitioner is holding possession of entire land. ‘Act, 1976’ was repealed by Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Repeal Act, 1999 (hereinafter referred to as ‘Repeal Act, 1999’) which came into force in State of U.P. on 18th March, 1999. In view thereof, now ceiling proceedings are abated but petitioner found that in revenue record entry has been made otherwise and when he sought correction of entry nothing has been done, hence this petition.

3. A counter-affidavit has been filed by State of U.P. and respondent No. 2 admitting that return was filed on 30.10.1976 by erstwhile tenure holder, Hamid. Thereafter, survey was made and under Section 8(3) a detailed statement was published on 10.11.1980. Khasra No. 185/3M (area 3637.56 square metre) and Khasra No. 167M (area 5690.70 square metre) i.e. total land 9328.26 square metre was proposed to be declared surplus. Said proposal was made final vide order dated 5.6.1981 under Section 8(4) of Act, 1976. Notification under Sections 10 (1) and (3) was published on 27.1.1986 and 10.3.1989. Application of tenure holder under Section 20 for exemption of land for agricultural purpose was rejected vide order dated 27th February, 1989. Notice under Section 10(5) was issued on 5.3.1993 and thereafter Tehshildar, Meerut took possession of surplus land on 3.4.1993. Entries in Revenue record in favour of State of U.P. were made on 16.6.1995. Thereafter disputed land was transferred to Meerut Development Authority (hereinafter referred to as ‘MDA’) and possession was handed over on 31.3.1997. In these circumstances, Repeal Act, 1999 has no application and writ petition deserves to be dismissed.

4. Since there was a factual dispute with regard to notice and possession etc., this Court summoned original record by order dated 5.5.2016.

5. Application submitted by Hameed, father of petitioner on 15th March, 1989 seeking exemption of land being used for agricultural purpose, under Section 20 of ‘Act, 1976’ is on record. Gazette notification under Section 10 was published on 28th July, 1990 and thereafter notice under Section 10(5) was sent to Hamid son of Chanda, resident of village Dugrawali, District Meerut by registered post, A.D., vide letter dated 5.3.1993. Dakhalnama shows that possession of land was taken on 3rd April, 1993 in presence of Sri Hamid but he refused to sign on Dakhalnama. Thereafter, competent authority sent a letter on 27th September, 1995 for change in Revenue record by removing name of Hamid and entering State Government therein. We also find on record a possession memo dated 31.3.1997 whereby disputed land was transferred in presence of Revenue Inspector to representative of ‘MDA’. Father of petitioner died in 1999. Petitioner Rashid submitted a representation dated 16.9.2003. It is on record, addressed to Secretary, Housing and Urban Planning