The court affirmed the State's authority to impose a minimum price condition for tribal land transfers under Section 36A of the MLRC, emphasizing the need for current market value to protect tribal interests.

JUDGMENT :

(Somasekhar Sundaresan, J.)

1. Rule. By consent of parties, rule is made returnable forthwith, and the Writ Petition is taken up for final hearing and disposal.

2. Whether the State Government has any right to impose a minimum price condition under Section 36A of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966 ("MLRC") when approving acquisition of land by a non-tribal from a tribal, is the prime question we have been presented with, when adjudicating this Writ Petition. We hold in the affirmative.

3. As an alternative, we have been petitioned to declare that the State Government must have regard to the value of the land as of the date of the application under Section 36A and not at the time of the approval. The law on this issue is well settled-the value must bear reference to the time of a valid application complete in all respects. However, in the facts of this case, the value of the land in 2012 has been rendered irrelevant because the Petitioners' proposal to acquire tribal land was rejected in 2021.

The Parties:

4. The Petitioners, Mr. Navin Popatlal Shah and Mr. Nitin Sundraji Shah (for short, "the Shahs"), have approached this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking intervention against the imposition of a minimum price requirement as part of an approval granted by the Respondent No. 1, the State of Maharashtra, for acquisition of land admeasuring 42.7 Ares, bearing Survey No. 30/6 situated at Ghodbundar Village, Thane ("Subject Tribal Land").

5. The Subject Tribal Land is admittedly owned by Respondents No. 6 to 10, namely, Mrs. Baby Narottam Panera, Devendra Narottam Panera, Mr. Yogendra Narottam Panera, Mrs. Mohini Narottam Panera and Mrs Visha Narottam Panera, (for short, "the Paneras"), who are also admittedly, tribals.

6. The Additional Secretary (Revenue) is Respondent No. 2. The Collector is Respondent No. 3 and the Additional Collector is Respondent No. 4, while the Divisional Commissioner, Konkan Division is Respondent No. 5.

7. The State has approved transfer of the Subject Tribal Land from the Paneras to the Shahs, but has imposed a minimum price, based on the Annual Statement of Rates (colloquially, "Ready Reckoner") published under the Maharashtra Stamp Act, 1958, as applicable for the year 2023-24. This has been applied because the approval for transfer under Section 36A was granted in the year 2023.

Section 36A of the MLRC:

8. Before delving into the factual matrix, an overview of the scheme and scope of Section 36A of the MLRC would be instructive. The relevant extracts are set out below:-

36A. (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1) of section 36, no occupancy of a Tribal shall, after the commencement of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code and Tenancy Laws (Amendment) Act, 1974, be transferred in favour of any non-Tribal by way of sale (including sales in execution of a decree of a Civil Court or an award or order of any Tribunal or authority), gift, exchange, mortgage, lease or otherwise, except on the application of such non-Tribal and except with the previous sanction-

(a) in the case of a lease or mortgage for a period not exceeding 5 years, of the Collector; and

(b) in all other cases, of the Collector with the previous approval of the State Government:

Provided that, no such sanction shall be accorded by the Collector unless he is satisfied that no Tribal residing in the village in which the occupancy is situate or within five kilometres thereof is prepared to take the occupancy from the owner on lease, mortgage or by sale or otherwise.

Provided further that, in villages in Scheduled Areas of the State of Maharashtra, no such sanction allowing transfer of occupancy from tribal person to non-tribal person shall be accorded by the Collector unless the previous sanction of the Gram Sabha under the jurisdiction of which the tribal transferor resides has been obtained.

Provided also that, in villages in Scheduled Areas of the State of Maharashtra, no sanction for purchase of