1. Dispute over whether occupants of government wasteland acquired legal rights by paying revenue to a mauzadar without a written lease under the Assam Land and Revenue Regulation, 1886. (Para 2 )
Back
Next 
1996 Supreme(SC) 513
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
(Assam High Court)
G B Pattanaik, K Ramaswamy
STATE OF ASSAM AND OTHERS, APPELLANTS
VERSUS
RADHA KANOO (SMT) AND OTHERS, RESPONDENTS.
Civil Appeals No. 4484 of 1996 with Nos. 4486 and 4485 of 1996
decided on March 1, 1996.
Important Points
Possession of government wasteland is only lawful if obtained via a written lease or permission from the Deputy Commissioner under Rule 16. Payment of revenue to a mauzadar does not confer legal rights on unauthorized occupants, who remain encroachers subject to ejectment.
Subject
Land Law - Encroachment
Act Referred
ASSAM LAND AND REVENUE REGULATIONS: R.18, R.17(a), R.17, R.16
Headnote
Assam Land and Revenue Regulation, 1886 - Section 3 - Possession of land - Area of lease as result of gain by alluvion - Only question is whether respondents have acquired any right in land in encroachment Cases Proceedings in said case were quashed by High Court in Civil Rule by judgment which is being followed in all other cases - High Court has that respondents are not encroachers - Revenue is not panel rental but respondents having been found in possession of land they cannot be ejected Rule Settlement Rules except after due in accordance with law – Held, Person is entitled to enter into possession in two characters namely settlement of written lease granted by Deputy Commissioner pursuant to written application or by written permission given by Deputy Commissioner pending settlement - In either of events person is entitled to enter into possession of government wasteland and from such person is entitled to collect revenue as contemplated in terms of lease - Since Rule gives express power to Deputy Commissioner either to increase revenue as specified in lease or to reduce revenue as circumstances warrant Rule - Would indicate that is local revenue collection agent of Government to collect revenue only in respect of persons who rightly and law full entered into possession of lands pursuant to orders in Rule - No other person has got any legitimacy to make any payment - Nor has any power to collect such land revenue from trespasser nor shall it bind Government which is contrary to provisions of Rule - Any other interpretation would be clearly repugnant to scheme of relevant provisions Regulation and Rules - With regard to other cases court think that since it is only an interim order passed by High Court and no reasons have been recorded on nature of possession respondents matter is remitted to Deputy Commissioner concerned - He would issue notice to respondents and after considering their objections decide whether they have any right acquired Rule 16as held in this order and then to take action accordingly - Order of High Court is set aside - Similarly in civil appeal matter is remitted to Deputy Commissioner concerned who would give notice respondents decide whether their possession is in accordance with Rule and would then take action thereon – Appeal allowed
Legal Category Hierarchy
Table of Contents
2. Whether payment of revenue to a mauzadar confers a right of occupation or prevents ejectment as an encroacher under the relevant settlement rules. (Para 3 )
3. Mauzadars are mere collection agents and cannot create rights; Rule 16 is mandatory, requiring a written lease or permission for lawful possession of government wasteland. (Para 4 , 5 )
4. Possession of government wasteland without a written lease or permission from the Deputy Commissioner constitutes encroachment, regardless of any revenue payments made to a collection agent. (Para 4 , 5 )
5. Appeals allowed; High Court order set aside; matters remitted to the Deputy Commissioner to determine lawful possession under Rule 16. (Para 6 , 7 , 8 )
6. Does payment of land revenue to a mauzadar confer legal rights of possession over government wasteland?
No. A mauzadar is a revenue collection agent and cannot create rights under Rule 16. Payments made by unauthorized occupants are illegal collections that do not bind the Government or legitimize possession. (Para 5 )
7. What are the mandatory requirements for lawful entry into possession of government wasteland under the Assam Land and Revenue Regulation?
Lawful possession requires either a written lease granted by the Deputy Commissioner following a written application or written permission granted by the Deputy Commissioner pending the issuance of such a lease. (Para 4 , 5 )
8. Under what circumstances can the Deputy Commissioner eject a person from government land?
Under Rule 18(1), the Deputy Commissioner may eject any person from land over which no person has acquired the rights of a proprietor, landholder, or settlement-holder. (Para 4 )
ORDER
1. Leave granted.
2. We have heard the learned counsel for the appellant. Though the respondents have been served they are not appearing either in person or through counsel. However, we have taken the assistance of Shri P.K. Goswami, learned Senior Counsel who has rich experience in this branch of law in the State of Assam. The only question is : whether the respondents have acquired any right in the land in encroachment Cases Nos. 5 of 1983 and 57 of 1986 ? Proceedings in the said case were quashed by the Guwahati High Court in Civil Rule No. 1243 of 1987 by judgment dated 26-3-1993 which is being followed in all other cases. The High Court has held that the respondents are not encroachers. Touzi Bahira Revenue is not a panel rental but the respondents having been found in possession of the land they cannot be ejected under Rule 18 of the Settlement Rules except after due ejectment in accordance with the law. The question, therefore, is : whether the view of the High Court is correct in law?
3. Shri Goswami contends that when mauzadar collects the rent from the occupants it is a collection within the meaning of Rule 39 of the executive instructions. The mauzadar, as contemplated under Rule 122 of the instructions, is enjoined to keep an account of collections and to deposit the same in the treasury once in four months. On the collections so made, the persons are entitled to remain in occupation until they are either confirmed with the lease or duly ejected in accordance with the law. The question, therefore, is : what is the status the respondents acquired under the regulation, the rules or the instructions read together ? It is seen that Section 3(b) of Assam Land and Revenue Regulation, 1886 (1 of 1886) (for short, the regulation) defines an Estate to include :
"(1) any land subject, either immediately or prospectively, to the payment of land revenue for the discharge of which a separate engagement has been entered into.
Section 12 of the Regulations gives power to the State to make regulations :
(i) for disposal by way of grant, lease or otherwise of such land,
(ii) the ejectment of any person who has entered into unauthorised occupation of such land, and
(iii) the disposal of any crop raised, or any building or other construction erected without authority on such land."
4. Rule 16 of the Rules framed under the Regulation prescribes that lease shall be issued on written application only, and no person shall enter into possession of wasteland in any area until a lease has been issued to him or otherwise a written permission by Deputy Commissioner has been granted to him, pending issue of such lease, to enter into possession. Rule 17 imposes liability to pay revenue on such settlement. Rule 17 -A gives power to the Deputy Commissioner to increase or reduce at any time, either on an application or of his own, the revenue in proportion to the change in area of the lease as a result of gain by alluvion or by dereliction of a river, or loss by diluvion, during the currency of the settlement. In other words, right of entry into possession of government land is hedged with a written lease or permission by Deputy Commissioner. They are entitled to pay revenue in terms of lease or permission. Any person who enters into possession otherwise than pursuant to Rule 16 is an encroacher into government vacant land. Rule 18 (1) provides thus :
"Subject as hereinafter provided, the Deputy Commissioner may eject any person from land over which no person has acquired the rights of a proprietor, landholder, or settlement-holder."
Rest of the rules are not material since they deal only with procedural aspects.
5. It is true, as pointed out by Shri Goswami that mauzadars have been given right to collect touzi of miscellaneous land revenue in the appropriate cash form prescribed in the instructions and that on collection the mauzadar is enjoined to deposit the collection so made in the manner prescribed. The question is : whether the
