IMPORTANT POINT
No permission is required under Section 4-B read with Section 4-C of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act, by the owners of the orchards to fell the old trees for replacing them by new saplings having greater potential of yield.

Headnote:(i) West Bengal Land Reforms Act, 1955-Section 4-B rw/s 4-C-Felling of trees on non-forest private plantation area/garden-Whether any permission is required u/s 4B rw/s 4C of the Act by the owners of orchards to fell the old trees for replacing them by new saplings having greater potential of yield-(No)-Appellant was owner of certain land classified as Bagan (garden) in the record of rights-Old trees in the land affected with uncontrollable worms and had lost their fruit bearing ability-Appellant decided to uproot them with an intention to renovate the garden by planting high breed saplings-After he cut two to three trees, local police personnel prevented him from further felling-Writ petition challenging action of officials-High Court permitted appellant to fell trees with certain conditions and restrictions-In the impugned judgment, it was stated that appellant was entitled to cut one out of ten trees in two years and replace that one with new sapling-It was further directed that appellant will not take recourse to felling of trees without giving one month s notice to the Collector-Collector was also empowered to inspect the land-Whether judgment of the High Court is sustainable-(No).
       Held : Section 4-B speaks of maintenance and preservation of land. Under this Section, every raiyat holding any land is obliged to maintain and preserve such land in such manner that its area is not diminished or its character is not changed or the land is not converted for any purpose other than the purpose for which it was settled or previously held except with the previous order in writing of the Collector under Section 4-C. Under the first proviso to the said Section, any raiyat may plant and grow trees on any land held by him within the ceiling area applicable to him and to his family without any previous order under Section 4-C, if such land is not cultivated by bargadar. From plain reading of this Section, it is clear that a raiyat cannot diminish area of the land or change its character or cannot convert the land for any purpose other than the purpose for which it was settled without the previous order in writing of the Collector. Felling of trees is not covered by this Section. Mere felling of trees cannot be taken as diminishing the area of the land or changing its character or converting it for any purpose other than the purpose for which it was settled. The first proviso shows that even a raiyat can plant and grow trees in any land held by him within the ceiling area if such land is not cultivated by bargadar. Section 4-C deals with the permission for change of area, character or use of land. Under this Section, a raiyat holding any land may apply to the Collector for change of area or character of such land or for conversion of the same for any purpose other than the purpose for which it was settled or was being previously used or for alteration in the mode of use of such land. Explanation to sub-section (1) of Section 4-C says that for the purpose of sub-section (1) of Section 4-C, mode or use of land may be residential, commercial, industrial, agriculture plantation of tea, pisciculture, forestry, sericulture, horticulture, public utilities or other use of land. In this view, permission of the Collector is required under Section 4-C for the purpose of change of area, character or use of land not for felling of trees in private plantation. Mere felling of trees neither diminishes the area nor changes the character or use of land covered by explanation to sub-section (1) of Section 4-C. Under Section 4-C(2), the Collector on receipt of application from a raiyat for change of use of land, conversion or alteration, as the case may be, pass an order. Under sub-section (5) of the said Section, the Collector, if satisfied that any land is being converted for any purpose other than the purpose for which it was settled or attempts are being made to effect alteration in the mode of use of such land or change of the area or character of such land, he may, by order restrain the raiyat from such act. Thus, Collector has to satisfy himself about any contravention in regard to conversion, change of use or change of area or character of land before passing an order to restrain the raiyat from such act. For any contravention of the provisions of the Act, the Act itself has provisions to take care of contravention, if any, under the Act. Thus, even combined reading of Sections 4-B and 4-C of the Act does not show that a permission of Collector is required to fell trees in non-forest private plantation area/garden. (Paras 16 and 17)
       Thus, in the light of legal position explained in various decisions, the High Court was not right in expanding the scope and application of Section 4-A so as to apply it to the areas in the State of West Bengal other than the area specified in three sub-divisions of Darjeeling District. When the intention of the legislature is clear to confine its application to the limited area, the court could not ignore it. The High Court was also not right in reading something more in Sections 4-B and 4-C in regard to the felling of trees in the absence of any such legislative intention expressed in these provisions. The court could not have added something more to these Sections. (Para 22)
       (ii) INTERPRETATION OF STATUTES-Purposive interpretation-A statute is to be interpreted on its plain reading-If two interpretations are possible, the one which promotes or favours the object of the Act and purpose it serves, is to be preferred-West Bengal Land Reforms Act, 1955.
       Held : It is well-settled principle of interpretation that a statute is to be interpreted on its plain reading; in the absence of any doubt or difficulty arising out of such reading of a statute defeating or frustrating the object and purpose of an enactment, it must be read and understood by its plain reading. However, in case of any difficulty or doubt arising in interpreting a provision of an enactment, courts will interpret such a provision keeping in mind the objects sought to be achieved and the purpose intended to be served by such a provision so as to advance the cause for which the enactment is brought into force. If two interpretations are possible, the one which promotes or favours the object of the Act and purpose it serves, is to be preferred. At any rate, in the guise of purposive interpretation, the courts cannot re-write a statute. A purposive interpretation may permit a reading of the provision consistent with the purpose and object of the Act but the courts cannot legislate and enact the provision either creating or taking away substantial rights by stretching or straining a piece of legislation. (Para 18)

JUDGMENT

Shivaraj V. Patil, J.-The short question that arises for consideration in this appeal is whether any permission is required under Section 4-B read with Section 4-C of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act, 1955 (for short the Act ) by the owners of the orchards to fell the old trees for replacing them by new saplings having greater potential of yield .

2. The appellant is the owner of certain land classified as Bagan (garden) in the record of rights. Since old trees in the land had been affected with uncontrollable worms and had lost their fruit bearing ability, the appellant decided to uproot them with an intention to renovate the garden by planting high breed saplings. After he cut two to three trees, the local police personnel and the Block Land Reforms Officer prevented the appellant from further felling, citing the judgment of the Supreme Court in T.N. Godavarman Thirumulkpad etc. vs. Union of India & Ors. [AIR 1997 SC 1228]. The appellant, in these circumstances, approached the High Court by filing Writ Petition No. 16280/1997 challenging the action of the officers and seeking certain directions. A learned Single Judge of the High Court referred the writ petition to the Division Bench (Green Bench). By the impugned judgment, the Division Bench of the High Court disposed of the writ petition permitting the appellant to fell trees standing in his garden but subject to certain conditions and restrictions.. Hence, this appeal is filed by the appellant questioning the validity and correctness of the impugned judgment contending that to fell the trees within his garden land, the appellant was not required to seek any permission under Section 4-B read with Section 4-C of the Act.

3. The learned counsel for the appellant in his arguments reiterated the submissions that were made before the High Court. He contended that in the absence of any provision in the Act or any other legislation requiring the appellant to take permission to fell tree in his garden land, admittedly it being not a forest land and the High Court was not right and justified in imposing certain restrictions and conditions to fell the trees. He also brought to our notice the decisions of the High Court dealing with similar issue. He added that the decision of the Supreme Court in T.N. Godavarman Thirumulkpad (supra) could not be applied to the facts of the case because the observations made and directions given in that case relate and confine to forest lands.

4. In opposition, the learned counsel for the respondents made submissions supporting the impugned judgment.

5. In order to appreciate the respective contentions, it is useful to refer to the relevant provisions of the Act:-

"Section 4A. Certain restrictions on rights of raiyats in Sadar, Kalimpong and Kurseong sub-divisions of Darjeeling district- (1) In the Sardar sub-division, Kalipong sub-division and Kurseong sub-division of the district of Darjeeling, the Collector of the district may, from time to time, give directions regarding the form of cultivation to be adopted by a raiyat in respect of his plot of land or prohibiting a raiyat from cutting more than one tree from his plot of land except with the previous permission in writing of the Collector or such other officer as may be authorized by the State Government in this behalf:

Provided that in giving directions as aforesaid, the Collector shall follow such procedure as may be prescribed.

(2) For contravention of any of the directions given under sub-section (1), the Collector may, after giving the defaulting raiyat an opportunity to show cause against the action proposed to be taken, impose upon him, by order, a fine not exceeding one thousand rupees which, if not duly paid, shall be recoverable as a public demand.

(3) An appeal, if presented within thirty days from the date of the order appealed against, shall lie to the Commissioner against any order passed by the Collector under sub-section (2) and the decision of the Commissioner shall be fi

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2004 Supreme(SC) 1311

IMPORTANT POINTNo permission is required under Section 4-B read with Section 4-C of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act, by the owners of the orchards to fell the old trees for replacing them by new saplings having greater potential of yield.

Cases Referred (3)

IMPORTANT POINT
No permission is required under Section 4-B read with Section 4-C of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act, by the owners of the orchards to fell the old trees for replacing them by new saplings having greater potential of yield.