MR. BHASKAR BHATTACHARYA, J.

1. While admitting Letters Patent Appeals being LPA No. 1106/2011, 1107/2011, 1111/2011 and 1116 of 2011 preferred by unsuccessful petitioners of four different Special Civil Applications, a Division Bench of this Court presided over by the then the Chief Justice directed that in view of the importance of the issue involved therein, the matters should be heard by a larger Bench. Consequently, this Bench was constituted for hearing all those four LPAs.

1.1 Subsequently, after taking into consideration the fact that various Special Civil Applications were pending before the learned Single Judge involving the selfsame point, we decided to give opportunity of making submissions to the learned counsel for the petitioners in those Special Civil Applications at the time of hearing of the above four appeals.

2.2 The subject matter of the four LPAs indicated above is the decision of the District Collector, Kutch who issued instructions to the concerned Mamlatdar to freeze the ‘khedut khatas’ [agricultural accounts] of the appellants until further instructions on the ground that the appellants are agriculturists belonging to other States and, therefore, they are illegally holding agricultural land within the State of Gujarat. Such instructions had been issued to various agriculturists including the appellants. In the writ-applications, the appellants had also challenged circular No. TNC/1073/58184/J of the Revenue Department of the Government of Gujarat dated 4th April 1973 wherein it was indicated that any sale of land made to any non-agriculturists in Gujarat on the strength of his status as agriculturist in any other State outside Gujarat would attract the provisions contained in section 63 of the Bombay Tenancy & Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 and section 54 of the Saurashtra Tenancy and Garkhed Settlement Ordinance and section 89 of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Land [Vidarba Region and Kutch Area) Act, 1958 [hereinafter referred to as the Act] on the strength of certificates about their status as agriculturists in other states.

3. Learned Single Judge before whom the writ-applications were moved dismissed those writ-applications.

4. Being dissatisfied, the appellants preferred the aforesaid four LPAs and as indicated above, the Division Bench, being prima facie satisfied that the interpretation so made by the State Government was not correct, and apart from that if it is held that an agriculturist of another State having no land in the State of Gujarat cannot purchase land in this State, in that case, the question would arise as to the violation of the provisions contained in part III of the Constitution of India, ordered to place the matters before a larger Bench.

5. Therefore, the only question that arises for determination in these matters is whether a person who does not own agricultural land within the State of Gujarat can be treated to be a non-agriculturist within the meaning of the Act simply because he does not cultivate any agricultural land within the State of Gujarat and on that ground, the purchase of any agricultural land by such a person will be hit by the provisions contained in section 89 of the Act.

6. In order to appreciate the aforesaid question, it will be profitable to refer to section 2(3), 12(12), 4 and section 89 of the Act which are quoted below:

2. Definitions.

(3) “agriculturist” means a person who cultivates land personally;

(12) “to cultivate personally” means to cultivate on one's own account -

(i) by one's own labour, or

(ii) by the labour of any member of one's family, or

(iii) under the personal supervision of oneself or of any member of one's family by hired labour or by servants on wages payable in cash or kind but not in crop share.

4. Determination of family holding. -

(1) The State Government shall determine for all or any class of land in each local area the area of a family holding on the following basis in the prescribed manner :-

(a) The extent of land which a family