JUDGMENT :

Heard.

2. The present writ petition has been preferred with the following main prayers:-

"i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus thereby commanding the opposite parties not to disturb the peaceful possession of the petitioner over Gata No. 72, Khata No. 178, area 1606.13 sq. mtrs. situated at village Chandan, Pargana, Tehsil and District Lucknow.

ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the opposite parties to restore the entries in the name of the petitioner over Gata No. 72, Khata No. 178, area 1606.13 sq. mtrs. situated at Village Chandan, Pargana, Tehsil and District Lucknow, as it was prior to 4.2.2008."

3. Brief facts of the case are that Gata No. 72 (1606.13 sq. mtrs.) situated at village Chandan, Pargana, Tehsil and District Lucknow was recorded in the name of Sukkha, the original tenure holder who was its Bhumidhar with transferable rights. A notice under Section 8(3) of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 (hereinafter referred to as 'Act, 1976') was issued in respect of aforesaid land and as per the opposite parties Sukkha did not respond, therefore, the said land measuring 1606.13 sq. mtrs. was declared surplus. On 09.09.1978, a notification under Section 10(1) of the Act, 1976 was issued. Thereafter on 12.05.1990, notification under Section 10(3) of the Act, 1976 was published. Sukkha was directed to handover possession of the said land on 24.01.1991, as claimed by the opposite parties, in view of Section 10(5) of the Act, 1976. Thereafter, the said land, as per opposite parties, was transferred to Lucknow Development Authority in view of Government Order dated 11.12.1996 and Section 10(6) of the Act, 1976, though the exact date of this transfer has not been mentioned. In fact in the counter affidavit of the State though it is mentioned that Sukkha was asked to handover possession of the land, but it is nowhere mentioned that he did handover or surrender his possession to the State authorities voluntarily or that it was forcibly taken. No proof of such handover or taking over of possession has been annexed by the opposite parties in the counter affidavit. Only a copy of notice under Section 10(5) of the Act, 1976 has been annexed which by itself does not prove handing over or taking over of actual possession. On 11.03.1999, the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Repeal Ordinance, 1999 was issued which was adopted by the State Legislature of U.P. under Article 252(2) of the Constitution of India on 18.03.1999. This Ordinance was replaced by the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Repeal Act, 1999 (Act No. 5 of 1999) (hereinafter referred to as the 'Repeal Act, 1999') by which the Act, 1976 was repealed. As per Section 5(2) of this Act, 1999, notwithstanding repeal of the Ordinance of 1999, anything done or action taken under the said Ordinance shall be deemed to have been done or taken under the corresponding provisions of the Act, therefore, the adoption dated 18.03.1999 by State of U.P. holds good for the Act, 1999 also.

4. Before referring to the provision of Repeal Act, 1999, it is relevant to mention that at some point of time Sukkha died and his daughter succeeded him with regard to his land and after coming into force of the Repeal Act, 1999, she executed a sale- deed in favour of the petitioner on 18.09.2000 as per the supplementary affidavit of the petitioner dated 11.02.2020, copy of which was served on the State, contents of which have not been denied by it. Copy of sale-deed is also annexed with it. Based on the said sale deed, petitioner was recorded in the revenue records as its Bhumidhar with transferable rights. Copy of khatauni pertaining to Gata No. 72 is annexed as Annexure no. 1 to the petition. By then, the State was not even recorded in respect of the said land and it was so recorded only on 04.02.2008. Sections 3 & 4 of the Repeal Act, 1999 read as under:-

"3. Saving.-(1) The repeal of the principal Act shall not aff