The central legal point established in the judgment is the broad construction of the word 'alienate' to prevent dispossession of the grantee from the granted lands, in line with the objective of the Act to protect the interests of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes grantees.

( 1 ) THIS writ petition is filed by the petitioners for quashing the orders dated 19-12-1990 and 26-2-1991 being Annexures-M and n respectively passed by the respondents/assistant commissioner and Deputy Commissioner, whereby the land in question has been resumed under the provisions of the karnataka Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prohibition on Transfer of Certain Lands) Act, 1978 (Act 2 of 1979) (for short, 'the Act' only ).

( 2 ) THE land in dispute is Survey No. 51/b situate at Bosmanahalli village in Alur Taluk. This land was given on a temporary lease for coffee plantation to respondent No. 3, who is a member of the Scheduled Caste, on 25-2-1966. But the said respondent instead of undertaking coffee plantation by himself, permitted the petitioners to undertake the operation under a power of attorney dated 28-4-1974. Subsequently, on 20th April, 1976 respondent No. 3 was granted a Saguvali Chit (Certificate of Grant) with a condition that he should not alienate the property within 15 years of grant in consonance with Rule 9 of the Rules. But the said respondent entered into an agreement for sale on 12-12-1978 with the petitioners and allowed them to remain on the land.

( 3 ) IT appears that subsequent thereto, there was a civil litigation between the parties giving rise to OS No. 160 of 1982 on the file of the Civil Judge at Hassan which ended in compromise as per order dated 10-12-1982 (Annexure-H ). Under the said compromise respondent No. 3 agreed to execute a registered sale deed in favour of the petitioners. This is how the petitioners remained in possession of the disputed land.

( 4 ) KEEPING in view of these facts, the respondents/assistant Commissioner initiated the proceedings under the provisions of the Act to resume the land since according to him the granted land was alienated in violation of the Rules within 15 years of grant, and, ultimately passed the impugned order at annexure-M. Against the said order an appeal was preferred before the second respondent which has also been dismissed vide annexure-N holding that the execution of an agreement for sale coupled with delivery of possession amounts to transfer of property in violation of the Rules, and, as such the order of the respondent Assistant Commissioner in resuming the land was valid.

( 5 ) LEARNED counsel for the petitioners submitted that delivery of possession coupled with execution of an agreement for sale does not amount to transfer in law and as such it cannot be said that respondent No. 3 has in any way violated the condition restricting alienation.

( 6 ) CLAUSE (e) of Section 3 of the Act defines 'transfer' as under:" (e) 'transfer' means a sale, gift, exchange, mortgage (with or without possession), lease or any other transaction not being a partition among members of a family or a testimentary disposition and includes the creation of a charge or an agreement to sell, exchange, mortgage or lease or enter into any other transaction. " therefore, from the definition noticed above, it is quite clear that delivery of possession coupled with an agreement for sale amounts to transfer. In that view of the matter, prohibition under Section 4 of the said Act comes into operation whereby transaction between the petitioner and respondent No. 3 became null and void. Once that finding is reached, under Section 5 of the Act the Assistant Commissioner becomes competent to take possession of such land after evicting all persons in possession thereof and restore the same to the original grantee or his legal heirs.

( 7 ) IN view of the proviso to Rule 16 of the Karnataka Land Grant Rules, 1969 the grant of land for cultivation of plantation crops is also subject to the condition of grant prescribed under rule 9 (l) (i) of the Rules which reads as under:"the grantee shall not alienate the land for a period of fifteen years from the date of taking possession:. . . "

( 8 ) NOW it is to be ascertained as to what does the expression 'alienate