Deletion of 'Devasthan Inam' Entry in Revenue Records Does Not Extinguish Religious Character of Land: Bombay High Court - 2025-04-15

Bombay High Court Upholds Protection of Devasthan Inam Lands: Revenue Entry Deletion Not a Path to Ownership

Mumbai, April 15, 2025 - The Bombay High Court has delivered a significant judgment reinforcing the legal protection afforded to Devasthan Inam lands in Maharashtra. In Writ Petition No. 1811 of 2019, a division bench presided over by Justice AmitBorkar quashed an order by the State of Maharashtra that had withdrawn land revenue exemption for a property classified as Devasthan Inam Class III. The court firmly established that merely deleting the ' Devasthan Inam ' entry from revenue records does not alter the religious character of the land or grant ownership to managers or Vahiwatdars.

Case Background and Legal Challenge

The case arose from a dispute concerning land in Vita, Sangli district, historically recorded as Devasthan Inam land belonging to Mhaswad Sidha Devasthan . Respondent No. 3 had applied to the State Government to remove the Devasthan Inam classification, seeking to circumvent restrictions on alienation under the Exemptions from Land Revenue (No.1) Act, 1863. The State government, relying on Clause 66 of the Joglekar Law Manual and a legal opinion, allowed the application, effectively withdrawing the land's revenue exemption. This order was challenged by the petitioners, descendants of a priest who had managed the temple land.

Arguments Presented

Petitioners' Counsel , Amicus Curiae Mr. Sunil G. Karandikar, argued that Clause 66 of the Joglekar Law Manual was not a valid source of legal power and could not override the statutory protections of the 1863 Act. He emphasized that the Joglekar Manual is merely an administrative guide and lacks the force of law. He highlighted that Section 8(3) of the 1863 Act explicitly prohibits the transfer of Devasthan Inam lands and this protection remains in force.

Respondents' Counsel , Mr. Nikhil N. Wadikar , defended the State’s order, arguing that it was based on a legal opinion and aimed to rectify revenue records where land was not generating sufficient income for the institution. He contended that the order only deleted the Devasthan entry and did not authorize sale, suggesting the petitioners' fears of alienation were misplaced.

Court's Reasoning: Upholding Sanctity of Devasthan Lands

Justice Borkar meticulously analyzed the legal framework governing Inam lands, emphasizing the distinction between Devasthan Inam s and personal Inams. The court reiterated the principle of res extra commercium , stating that Devasthan Inam lands are considered "outside the market" and cannot be freely transferred.

The judgment underscored the paramountcy of the Exemptions from Land Revenue (No.1) Act, 1863, particularly Section 8(3), which imposes an absolute bar on the transfer of religious or charitable lands exempted from revenue. The court explicitly stated:

> "Section 8(3) of the Act acts as a shield protecting religious property, not a sword for the manager to claim personal ownership. As long as Section 8(3) is in force and applicable, any transfer of Devasthan land without proper legal sanction would be null and void in the eyes of law."

The court rejected the reliance on the Joglekar Law Manual, clarifying its non-statutory nature and inability to override explicit legislative provisions. It further refuted the notion that withdrawing revenue exemption or deleting revenue entries could extinguish the religious character of the land or grant ownership to managers.

> "A Vahiwatdar cannot become owner of Devasthan Inam Class III land just by changing the revenue record. Deleting the " Devasthan Inam " entry without a proper legal process does not change the real nature of the land. Section 8(3) of the 1863 Act puts an absolute bar on selling or transferring such land. Any sale made by manager of Vahiwatdar claiming himself to be owner is void."

Referring to Angurbala Mullick vs. Debabrata Mullick , the court reiterated that a deity is the legal owner of Devasthan land, with the Vahiwatdar merely acting as a manager.

Final Decision and Implications

The Bombay High Court allowed the Writ Petition, quashing the State Government's order. It declared that the land in question remains classified as Class III Devasthan Inam land. This judgment reaffirms the robust legal safeguards protecting Devasthan Inam lands in Maharashtra against unauthorized transfers and attempts to misappropriate them by manipulating revenue records. The ruling clarifies that revenue entries are for fiscal purposes and do not determine ownership, especially for religiously endowed properties protected by specific legislation. This decision serves as a crucial precedent for preserving the sanctity and intended use of Devasthan lands for religious and charitable purposes.