SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Surinder Singh Nijjar And H.L. Gokhale, JJ.
Gohil Jesangbhai Raysangbhai & Ors. - Appellant (s)
Versus
State of Gujarat & Anr. - Respondent (s)
CIVIL APPEAL NO.4123, 4124, 4125, 4126, 4127, 4129, 4130, 4131, 4132, 4133, 4134, 4135 OF 2012
Decided On : 25-02-2014
(1982) 3 SCC 316 – Relied upon
AIR 1970 Gujarat 204 – Cited with approval
(b) Gujarat Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 – Section 43 – Consideration amount payable for transfer of land – It is neither tax nor fee – It is a premium for granting the sanction – A tenant is required to cultivate his land and not put it to non-agricultural purposes – He must suffer restrictions for acquiring benefits under scheme of the statute – Insistence upon premium is also to make such transfers to non- agricultural purpose unattractive. (Para 20)
AIR 1982 SC 887 – Relied upon
AIR 1970 Gujarat 204 – Cited with approval
(2005) 10 SCC 203; (2012) 4 SCC 483; (2011) 9 SCC 354 – Referred
(c) Gujarat Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 – Section 43 – Provision requires prior sanction of Collector for transfer – Therefore relevant date for application of rate would be the date of sanction by Collector and not the date of application. (Para 21)
(d) Gujarat Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 – Section 43 – Normally sanction will be granted if application is bona fide. (Para 22)
(e) Gujarat Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 – Section 43 – Time taken in sanctioning transfer – Application for transfer cannot be kept pending indefinitely – Should be decided within 90 days. (Para 24)
(1969) 2 SCC 187 – Relied upon
Facts of the case:
All these Civil Appeals raise the questions with respect to the validity of Section 43 of Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 as applicable to the State of Gujarat, now known in the State of Gujarat as Gujarat Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948. These appeals raise the questions also with respect to the validity of resolution dated 4.7.2008 passed by the Government of Gujarat to give effect to this section, and which resolution fixes the rates of premium to be paid to the State Government for converting, transferring, and for changing the use of land from agricultural to non-agricultural purposes. Thirdly, these appeals seek to challenge the minimum valuation of land as per the rates contained in the list called as “Jantri” prevalent since 20.12.2006.
The High Court dismissed the challenge to validity of the provision.
Finding of the Court:
The provision and its amendment is protected by Schedule 9 of the Constitution.
JUDGEMENT
H.L. Gokhale J.
All these Civil Appeals raise the questions with respect to the validity of Section 43 of Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 as applicable to the State of Gujarat, now known in the State of Gujarat as Gujarat Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 (“Tenancy Act” for short). This section places certain restrictions on the transfer of land purchased or sold under the said Act. These appeals raise the questions also with respect to the validity of resolution dated 4.7.2008 passed by the Government of Gujarat to give effect to this section, and which resolution fixes the rates of premium to be paid to the State Government for converting, transferring, and for changing the use of land from agricultural to non-agricultural purposes. Thirdly, these appeals seek to challenge the minimum valuation of land as per the rates contained in the list called as “Jantri” prevalent since 20.12.2006.
2. The Tenancy Act was passed way-back in the year 1948, as a beneficial legislation and as a part of agrarian reform. This section has been amended twice thereafter, first in 1960 and then in 1977. The aforesaid challenge was first taken in the High Court of Gujarat by filing various Special Civil Applications (i.e. Writ Petitions) bearing Spl. C.A. No.12661 of 1994 and others which came to be dismissed. Thereafter the Letter Patent Appeals bearing Nos.1127 of 2008 and others were filed against the judgments rendered by Single Judges in these different Special Civil Applications. The judgment rendered by a Division Bench dated 3.5.2011 in a group of these Letter Patent Appeals and Special Civil Applications once again repelled the challenge. This common judgment has led to this group of 12 Civil Appeals. The issues raised in these Civil Appeals are by and large similar, though there are some additional points in some of these Civil Appeals depending upon the facts of each of those cases.
3. Mr. Huzefa Ahmadi and Mr. P.H. Parekh, both senior counsel, and Mr. Bharat Patel, learned counsel, have amongst others appeared for the appellants. Mr. Rohinton Nariman, senior counsel and Ms. Hemantika Wahi have appeared for the State of Gujarat and its officers to defend the impugned judgment.
4. The above referred Section 43 of the Tenancy Act reads as follows:-
“43. Restriction on transfers of land purchased or sold under this Act.- (1) No land or any interest therein purchased by a tenant under section 17B, 32, 32F, 32-I, 32-O, 32U, 43-ID or 88E or sold to any person under section 32P or 64 shall be transferred or shall be agreed by an instrument in writing to be transferred, by sale, gift, exchange, mortgage, lease or assignment, without the previous sanction of the Collector and except in consideration of payment of such amount as the State Government may by general or special order determine; and no such land or any interest, there shall be partitioned without the previous sanction of the Collector.
Provided that no previous sanction of the Collector shall be required, if the partition of the land is among the members of the family who have direct blood relation or among the legal heirs of the tenant:
Provided further that the partition of the land as aforesaid shall not be valid if it is made in contravention of the provisions of any other law for the time being in force;
Provided also that such members of the family or the legal heirs shall hold the land, after the partition, on the same terms, conditions, restrictions as were applicable to such land or interest thereat therein purchased by the tenant or the person.
(1A) The sanction under sub-section (1) shall be given by the Collector in such circumstances and subject to such conditions, as may be prescribed by the State Government.
(1AA) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1), it shall be lawful for such tenant or a person to mortgage or create a charge
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.