Uncultivated lands in the possession of the Inamdars on the appointed date did not vest in the Government under Section 7 of the Bombay Personal Inams Abolition Act, 1952, as they were covered by Section 5, which applied to all lands in the Inamdar's possession.

CHAINANI C. J. - The petitioners were the Inamdars of two Inam villages Vinchur and Sayakhede in Niphad Taluka. The Inams were abolished by the Bombay Personal Inams Abolition Act, 1952. In each of the two villages the Inamdars were in actual possession of some Kuran lands. These lands were not sown or cultivated, but grass grew naturally in these lands. The Inamdars used to graze their cattle on these lands and they also used to sell the grass and realised income from it. As the lands were in possession of the petitioners, they were shown as the occupants of the lands. The Collector subsequently felt that they had wrongly been shown as occupants, as in his opinion the lands vested in Government under s. 7 of the Act. A mutation entry was, therefore, made deleting the names of the petitioners. This was objected to by the petitioners. An inquiry was then held under s. 37 (2) of the Land Revenue Code in order to decide whether the lands vested in the Government under s. 7 of the Act. The Mamlatdar held that as the lands were uncultivated lands, they vested in Government. This order has been confirmed in appeal by the Deputy Collector and subsequently by the Additional collector and also by the Revenue Tribunal.

2. Sub -section (2) of s. 5. of the Act is in the following terms:

"(a) An inamdar in respect of the inam land in his actual possession or in possession of a person holding from him other than an inferior holder, referred to in clause (b) below, or

(b) an inferior holder holding inam land on payment of annual assessment only, shall primarily be liable to the State Government for the payment of land revenue due in respect of such land held by him and shall be entitled to all the rights and shall be liable to all obligations in respect of such land as an occupant under the Code or the rules made there under or any other law for the time being in force. "

This sub -section applies to lands, which on the appointed date, that is, the date on which the Act came into force, were in the possession of the Inamdar or of a person holding from him other than an inferior holder or of an inferior holder. Such lands do not vest in the State Government, but are to be held by the Inamdar or the inferior holders as occupants under the Land Revenue Code. The sub -section does not make any exception in the case of uncultivated land.

3. Section 7 of the Act provides:

" All public roads, lanes and paths, the bridges, ditches, dikes and fences, on or beside, the same, the bed of the sea and of harbours, creeks below high water mark and of rivers, streams, nallas, lakes, wells and tanks, and all canals, and water courses, and all standing and flowing water, all unbuilt village site lands, all waste lands and all uncultivated lands (excluding lands used for building or other non -agricultural purposes ), which are situate within the limits of any inam village or inam land, shall, except in so far as any rights of any person, other than the inamdar may be established in or over the same and except as may otherwise be provided by any law for the time being in force, vest in and shall be deemed to be, with all rights in or over the same or appertaining thereto, the property of the State Government and all rights held by an inamdar in such property shall be deemed to have been extinguished ... "

The explanation to this section states that for the purposes of this section, land shall be deemed to be uncultivated if it has not been cultivated for a continuous period of three years immediately before the appointed date. Under this section, all waste lands and all uncultivated lands, excluding lands used for building or other non -agricultural purposes and excluding rights which persons other than the inamdar had in such lands, vest in the State Government.

4. The question, which arises for determination, is whether the lands in dispute, in which grass grows naturally but which were in the possession of the petitioners on the appointed da