Judgment :- 1. The petitioner has approached this Court with a prayer for issuance of a writ, in the nature of certiorari, to call for the records of the order of Ceiling passed by the 2nd respondent vide proceedings in Na.Ka.No.2537/97A dated 19.12.1997 pertaining to the petitioner's lands in S.No.77/1 and S.No.74/3 Semancheri Village, Tambaram Taluk, Kancheepuram District, measuring 49 ½ cents in S.No.77/1 and 71 cents in S.No.74/3, and quash the same. 2. The petitioner is the owner of the land referred to above. The said land was purchased by the petitioner vide sale deed dated 26.8.1981, registered as document No.3304/81. The petitioner claims to be in possession and enjoyment of the land since the date of purchase. 3. It is the submission of the petitioner, that it was in the month of 2002, that he came to know that there were proceedings in respect of the land belonging to him under the Urban Land Ceiling Act. 4. The petitioner made enquiries from the office of the respondents and came to know that the orders to acquire the land was passed under the Tamil Nadu Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulations) Act, 1978. [hereinafter referred to as 'Act'] 5. It is the submission of the petitioner that the orders for acquisition was passed in exercise of powers under Section 9 (5) of the Act. It is the submission of the petitioner that notice under Section 7 (2) of the Act was served by way of affixation and not served on the petitioner though he was a registered owner of the property. The petitioner therefore submits that the order acquiring the land of the petitioner was passed without notice to the petitioner, therefore order having been passed without notice is void. 6. It is also the submission of the petitioner that he has not been served with any notice under the provisions of the Act nor any final order was served on the petitioner. The petitioner therefore challenged the proceedings, being arbitrary and violative of provisions of the Act, as also violative of principles of natural justice. 7. 6. It is also the submission of the petitioner that he has not been served with any notice under the provisions of the Act nor any final order was served on the petitioner. The petitioner therefore challenged the proceedings, being arbitrary and violative of provisions of the Act, as also violative of principles of natural justice. 7. It is submitted, that now the Act has been repealed, and as per Act 20/90, all proceedings and orders of Ceiling passed by the competent authority stand abated and nullified automatically, in view of the fact that the possession was not taken from the petitioner, who still continue to be in possession and is paying taxes to the Department. 8. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner has approached the appellate authority for quashing the proceedings, however, the appeal was not entertained in view of the repeal of the Act. 9. The petitioner also submits that he is paying Urban Tax which shows that he is in possession of the property. 10. The petitioner has, approached this Court for quashing of order of acquisition passed under the Act. 11. The writ petition is opposed by the respondent, on the ground that the possession has already been taken by the Tahsildar. This contention of the respondent cannot be accepted, as the petitioner has neither placed on record the final order determining the compensation, nor any document has been placed on record showing taking of physical possession, rather it is proved that proceedings were taken without notice to the petitioner. 12. Therefore, keeping in view that the impugned proceeding are in violation of principles of natural justice and violative of the statutory provisions, and further in view of the fact that Act stands repeal, the impugned order cannot be sustained. 13. Consequently, this writ petition is allowed. The impugned proceeding under the Act is ordered to be quashed. No costs. Consequently Miscellaneous petitions are closed.