Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
Gauri Godse, J.
Trimurti Sahakari Griha Nirman Sanstha Limited - Appellant
Versus
The Additional Commissioner Pune Division , Pune & Ors. - Respondents
Writ Petition No. 5982 of 2003
Decided On : 11-06-2024
Breach of Conditions - Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act - Section 63, Section 84B, Section 84C, Section 70 - The court discussed the provisions of the Maharashtra Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, particularly Section 63, which prohibits the transfer of agricultural land to non-agriculturists without prior permission, and Section 84C, which outlines the procedure for addressing breaches of tenancy conditions. The court interpreted these provisions to conclude that the petitioner society had breached the conditions of the regrant by using the land for non-agricultural purposes without the necessary permissions, thus justifying the resumption of the land by the State. The court emphasized the binding nature of the regrant conditions and the necessity of compliance for the continued possession of the land.
Fact of the Case:
The petition arises from an order by the Sub Divisional Officer (SDO) directing the resumption of land due to alleged breaches of the regrant conditions and Section 63 of the Bombay Tenancy Act. The land was originally Inam land, regranted to the heirs of Keshav Laxman Jadhav in 1964 with specific conditions, including agricultural use only. The petitioner society, formed in 1979, acquired the land and later sought non-agricultural use permissions, which were not fully granted. The SDO issued a show cause notice for breaches, leading to the resumption order.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that while the society had breached the conditions of the regrant by using the land for non-agricultural purposes without the required payment of 50% of the market value, the action taken for resumption based on Section 63 of the Tenancy Act was time-barred. The court directed the Tahsildar to quantify the amount due under the regrant conditions, allowing the society to rectify the breach by payment.
Issues: 1. Whether the sale deed executed in favor of the society violated Section 63 of the Tenancy Act. 2. Whether the non-agricultural use constituted a breach of the regrant conditions. 3. Whether the actions taken by the authorities were within a reasonable time frame.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the conditions of the regrant were binding and that the society's non-compliance with the payment condition constituted a breach. However, the authorities' action for resumption based on Section 63 was not timely, as it was initiated years after the alleged breach. The court emphasized the need for timely enforcement of tenancy provisions.
Final Decision: The petition was partly allowed, directing the Tahsildar to quantify the amount payable under the regrant conditions. The order of resumption was held in abeyance for six months to allow compliance, with the stipulation that failure to pay would result in confirmation of the resumption order.
JUDGMENT
Gauri Godse, J. - This petition arises out of an order passed by the Sub Divisional Officer ('SDO') directing the resumption of land in the Government on the ground of breach of the condition of the order of regrant and breach of Section 63 of the Bombay Tenancy Act and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 (now Maharashtra Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act)('Tenancy Act').
Petitioners case:
2. The land, which is the subject matter of the proceedings, was originally Inam land, which was in the possession of one Keshav Laxman Jadhav-Sarnaik. After the death of Keshav, the names of his sons were entered in the revenue record on 24th October 1953 vide mutation entry no. 3306. On 30th April 1964, an order was passed recording the regrant of the land to the heirs and legal representatives of deceased Keshav on payment of Nazrana amount. The land was thereafter converted from Inam land to 'Rayatwa Lands' on certain terms and conditions. The terms and conditions of the regrant were recorded by way of mutation entry no. 6273 dated 8th December 1964. The members of the family of deceased Keshav sold the land to one Patel family by a registered sale deed dated 11th February 1970. Pursuant to the said sale deed, mutation entry no. 7412 was effected on 25th May 1970.
3. The petitioner-society was formed in the year 1979. The petitioner made an application to the Assistant Registrar, seeking permission to open a bank account, and by order dated 19th March 1979, permission was granted to the petitioner to open a bank account. A sale deed was executed on 14th November 1985 in favour of the petitioner in respect of the said land. Thereafter, on 7th August 1986, the petitioner society was registered, and the registration certificate was issued. The petitioner was classified as a tenant/ownership society with a total of 33 members. On 4th August 1986, a no objection certificate was issued by the Kolhapur Municipal Corporation for sanitation and health for the layout of the petitioner. A mutation entry no. 13212 was effected on 4th April 1987 for recording the name of the petitioner as proposed society in respect of the subject land. By way of mutation entry no. 16139, the name of the petitioner was corrected in the revenue record by removing the word 'proposed'. The corporation thereafter sanctioned a layout plan for 33 plots for the members of the petitioner in the subject land. As per the sanctioned layout, the society allotted plots to 33 members and handed over actual physical possession of the respective plots.
4. Members of the society made an application to enter their names in the revenue record with respect to the respective plots allotted to them. By mutation entry no.16950, the names of the members were entered into the revenue record on 21st July 1994 as against their respective allotment of plots. On 7th November 1988, a few members of the petitioner applied for the conversion of their respective plots to non-agricultural use. Since there was no response received on the said application, the petitioner considered it as deemed permission under Section 44(3) of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code 1966 ('MLRC'). By order dated 13th September 1989, the learned Collector passed an order granting permission for non-agricultural use for plot no. 7, and by order dated 21st December 1990, permission for non-agricultural use was granted for another plot no. 29.
5. A show cause notice was issued by the learned Tahsildar on 30th January 1997 to the petitioner for breach of terms and conditions of the regrant, and if the society was willing to pay 50% of the market value as Nazrana for non-agricultural use, the petitioner was called upon to submit consent letter. The petitioner-society replied to the said show cause notice on 6th February 1997, showing their willingness to pay Nazrana amount for regularizing the alleged breach. On 25th March 1997, the petitioner filed a fresh application in the prescribed format for non-agricultural use of the subject
The court established that while conditions of land regrant are binding and must be complied with, enforcement actions based on breaches must be initiated within a reasonable time frame to be valid.
It is now well-settled principles of law that non-mentioning or wrong mentioning of a provision of law does not invalidate an order in the event it is found that a power therefore exists
The last contention regarding n on applicability of provisions of the Act to a land which is permitted to be converted into n on agricultural land by a competent Court also merits acceptance in light....
The central legal point established in the judgment is the significance of the exemption certificate under Section 88C of the Maharashtra Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948, in determining proc....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
