2019 Supreme(Bom) 533
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT NAGPUR
R.K. DESHPANDE, S.M. MODAK, JJ.
WASUDEO - Appellant
Vs.
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA - Respondent
Writ Petition No. 1422 of 2007
Decided On : 29-03-2019
S.P. Kshirsagar, Adv., N.R. Patil, Adv.
The burden of proof lies with the applicant to establish the conditions for deemed permission under Section 44(3) of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966.
Headnote:
Permission - Maharashtra Land Revenue Code - Section 44 - [44] - The court discussed the provisions of Section 44 of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966, which govern the procedure for conversion of land use from agricultural to non-agricultural purposes. The court emphasized the importance of obtaining acknowledgment of the application within seven days and the requirement to prove the date of receipt of the application in order to claim the benefit of deemed permission under sub-section (3) of Section 44. The court held that the burden of proof lies with the applicant to establish that the conditions for deemed permission are satisfied.
Fact of the Case:
The petition challenges the rejection of the petitioner's application for permission to convert agricultural land for non-agricultural use under Section 44 of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioner failed to prove the date of receipt of the application and the acknowledgment of the application, thus failing to establish the conditions for deemed permission under Section 44(3) of the Code.
Issues: The main issue was whether the permission was deemed to have been granted to the petitioner for non-agricultural purpose in accordance with sub-section (3) of Section 44 of the Code.
Ratio Decidendi: The burden of proof lies with the applicant to establish the conditions for deemed permission under Section 44(3) of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966.
Final Decision: The writ petition was dismissed, allowing the petitioner to file a fresh application for consideration in accordance with the law.
1. By consent of the learned Counsels appearing for the parties, the matter is finally heard, as it was admitted on 18th th September, 2017.
2. The petition challenges the communication dated 05/06/2006 rejecting the application of the petitioner filed under Section 44 of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966 (hereinafter referred to as 'Code' for the sake of brevity) for grant of permission to convert the agricultural land for non-agricultural use. The reason assigned is that the petitioner has failed to obtain 'no objection certificates' from the Town Planning Department as well as from the Tahsildar Ramtek.
3. According to the petitioner, the application dated 01/03/2006 in the prescribed form for grant of permission under Section 44(1)(a) of the Code was submitted in respect of land Survey No.34/1, Tahsil Ramtek, District Nagpur and in terms of subsection (3) of Section 44 of the Code. If such application is not decided within a period of 90 days, the permission is deemed to have been granted. According to the petitioner, the period of 90 days expired on 02/06/2006 and the order of rejection was passed on 05/06/2006. Reliance is placed upon the decision of the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Ganesh Ginning and Pressing Company Ltd., Jalna vs. State of Maharashtra and others, (2005) 4 MhLJ 263.
4. The petition is opposed by the respondents on the ground that 'no objection certificates' were not obtained from two authorities and that the land was proposed to be reserved as per the Government Circular dated 28/11/1987 for Sanskrit University, Ramtek. It is also the reason stated in the reply filed to this petition that the Government has directed to prohibit the sale transaction and also not to give non-agriculture permission. It is also the stand that the permission from M.S.E.B. was not obtained.
5. Essentially, the question involved in the present petition is whether the permission is deemed to have been granted to the petitioner for non-agricultural purpose in respect of Survey No.31/1, Tahsil Ramtek, District Nagpur in terms of sub-section (3) of Section 44 of the Code.
6. The question of procedure for conversion of use of the land from one purpose to another is governed by Section 44 of the Code. The provisions of sub-sections (1), (2) & (3) of Section 44 of the Code, being relevant, are reproduced below.
"44. Procedure for conversion of use of land from one purpose to another -
(1) Subject to the provisions of sub-section (2) of section 42, if an occupant of unalienated land or a superior holder of alienated land or a tenant of such land -
(a) which is assessed or held for the purpose of agriculture, wishes to use it for a non-agricultural purpose, or
(b) if land is assessed or held for a particular nonagricultural purpose, wishes to use it for another nonagricultural purpose, or
(c) desires to use it for the same non-agricultural purpose for which it is assessed but in relaxation of any of the conditions imposed at the time of grant of land or permission for such non-agricultural purpose, such occupant or superior holder or tenant shall, with the consent of the tenant, or as the case may be, of the occupant or superior holder, apply to the Collector for permission in accordance with the form prescribed.
(2) The Collector, on receipt of an application, -
(a) shall acknowledge the application within seven days;
(b) may, unless the Collector directs otherwise, return the application if it is not made by the occupant or superior holder or as the case may be, the tenant or if the consent of the tenant, or as the case may be, of the occupant or superior holder has not been obtained, or if it is not in accordance with the form prescribed;
(c) may, after due enquiry, either grant the permission on such terms and conditions as he may specify subject to any rules made in this behalf by the State Government; or refuse the permission applied for, if it is necessary so to do to secure the public health, safety and conven