JUDGMENT - V.G. PALSHIKAR, J.:---This petition, though of the year 2000, was given utmost precedence as it was allegedly filed in public interest by the public interest conscious citizens of India. The petitioners were honourably allowed to jump a long queue of litigating public waiting for their cases to be heard by this Court on the averment of the petitioners that the petition involves public interest and should, therefore, be heard with priority.

2. The facts giving rise to this petition stated briefly are that Survey Number 289 was given to one Vithoba Pandurang Parchake, resident of Warud, District Wardha by the Bhudan Board functioning under the Bhudan Yagna Act, 1953. Said Vithoba executed Exchange Deed of this land allotted to him by the Bhudan Mandal, exchanging that land with survey number 126, area 2.45 hectare. Thus, the donees i.e. legal representatives of Vithoba acquired by exchange 2.45 hectare of land and parted 1.88 hectare of land. The donees from Bhudan Mandal were thus obviously gainers in the matter of acreage of land in their possession. This action of exchange took place on 17-8-1994. The petitioners admit that by virtue of sections 23 and 24 of the Bhudan Yagna Act, 1953, Vithoba and his legal representative have become owners of the land and it was as owners of this land that they had exchanged it with the other respondents by Deed dated 17-8-1994. Factually and legally, therefore, after allotment of land to Vithoba by Bhudan Yagna Mandal, the land ceased to be the land of Bhudan Mandal and became land of donee Vithoba and it was Vithoba that in 1994 had exchanged it for more with the persons with whom he executed Exchange Deed. The provisions of Bhudan Yagna Act, 1953 prohibits such exchange if it is not in the interest of objectees and or benefits of the donee.

3. Thereafter somewhere in 1996 the user of this land Survey Number 289, area 1.88 hectare was changed to non-agriculture by persons who got it under the exchange deed and it was only in the year 2000 that it dawned upon the petitioners to start this litigation in public interest for quashing the conversion of land to non-agricultural use on the ground that it violates the spirit of Bhudan Yagna Act, for commercialisation of Bhudan lands under the said Act is not permissible as also under the Land Revenue Code and it is certainly against public interest. It is alleged that if such conversions are allowed to take place, the very purpose of the Bhudan Yagna Act will be defeated and, therefore, extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court was invoked for quashing the action of conversion, in public interest.

4. As aforesaid out-of-turn hearing was given in this matter. We heard extensively Mr. G.G. Modak, learned Advocate for petitioners and Mr. V.R. Manohar, learned Senior Advocate appearing on behalf of the persons getting in exchange the Bhudan land. Other respondents were duly represented.

5. It was the contention on behalf of the petitioners that the petitioners are not guilty of latches or delay in approaching this Court after eight years of the exchange deed, because they have approached the Court in public interest only when they came to know about the exchange. Reliance was placed on the Supreme Court decision in (M.C. Mehta v. Union of India and others)1, 1999(1) Bom.C.R. (S.C.)765 to point out that delay cannot be a ground for dismissing public interest litigation. He also relied on certain provisions of Bhudan Yagna Act, 1953 for contending that the entire act contemplates agricultural or collateral use of land and conversion of it for non-agricultural purpose, is impermissible in law. According to him, even exchange is not possible except in cases covered by section 33 of the Act. The pre-ponderence of that section being, according to the learned Counsel for petitioners, that exchange can be undertaken for community purpose. What is “community purpose”, is not defined in the Act. He, therefore, contends that non-agricultural use of this l

Click Here to Read the rest of this document