The absence of rules authorizing the imposition of conditions restraining alienation at the time of the land grant rendered the transaction not hit by Section 4 of the Act.

( 1 ) THIS writ appeal is against the order of the learned Single Judge dated 21-11-2000 passed in W. P. No. 10391 of 2000.

( 2 ) THE parties in this appeal are referred to as arraigned in the writ petition.

( 3 ) THE facts in this case are as follows: a land measuring 4 acres in old Sy. No. 67 and new Sy. No. 130 of nanjapura Village, Jigani Hobli, Anekal Taluk, was granted in favour of the father of the petitioner on 13-12-1936. The said land was sold by the father of the petitioner in favour of the father of the 1st respondent under a registered sale deed on 19-6-1947. Consequent on coming into force of the Karnataka Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prohibition of Transfer of Certain Lands) Act, 1978 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), the petitioner made an application before the assistant Commissioner for a declaration that the sale dated 19-6-1947 was void and for restoration of the possession of the said land. The assistant Commissioner allowed the application by declaring the sale made by the father of the petitioner in favour of the father of the 1st respondent as void and ordered for restoration of possession. This order was challenged by the 1st respondent by way of an appeal before the deputy Commissioner. The Deputy Commissioner set aside the order of the Assistant Commissioner by dismissing the application filed by the petitioner holding that the petitioner is not entitled for the relief since the sale has not been made in violation of any of the conditions of the grant. This order was challenged by the petitioner by way of a writ petition before this Court. The learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition confirming the order of the Deputy Commissioner holding that as on the date of grant, there were no rules providing for imposition of conditions prohibiting alienation. This order is under challenge in this writ appeal. Section 4 (1) of the Act reads as follows:-"notwithstanding anything in any law agreement, contract or instrument, any transfer of granted land made either before or after the commencement of this Act in contravention of the terms of the grant of such land or the law providing for such grant or sub-section (2) shall be null and void and no right, title or interest in such land shall be conveyed or be deemed ever to have conveyed by such transfer".

( 4 ) FROM a reading of this section, it is clear that if there is any transfer in contravention of the terms of the grant of the land or law providing for such grant, the said transfer, by operation of law, becomes null and void.

( 5 ) IN the instant case, the grant made in favour of the father of the petitioner is on 13-12-1936. The father of the petitioner sold the said land in favour of the father of the 1st respondent under the registered sale deed dated 19-6-1947.

( 6 ) NOW the point that arises for our consideration is: Whether there is any violation of any conditions of the grant so as to say that the above said transaction is null and void?

( 7 ) ADMITTEDLY, the grantee belongs to a scheduled caste. Further, it is also not in dispute that the grant is made on 13-12-1936. No rule stipulating any period for non-alienation of such land had been framed then. Therefore, as on the date of the grant, what has to be seen is, whether any condition could have been imposed while granting the land.

( 8 ) THIS Court in the case of Bandyamma v Assistant Commissioner, bangalore Sub-Division, Bangalore and Others, relying upon the government order dated 12-9-1929 held that the sale of land granted on 27-10-1937 in the year 1949 is within the prohibitory period and accordingly declared the said sale as null and void.

( 9 ) THE learned Counsel appearing for the 1st respondent contends that the said Government order cannot be treated as the one authorised under the law to impose condition prohibiting alienation in the absence of any such rule providing for imposition of condition regarding alienation. In order to consider these