SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2011 Supreme(All) 554

VINEET SARAN, F. I. REBELLO
SUMAN CHAUHAN – Appellant
Versus
UNION OF INDIA – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel :
H.N. Singh for the Petitioner; A.S.G.I., P. Padia for the Respondents.

Judgement Key Points

Key Points: - The Collector's prior approval is mandatory under Section 157-A for transfers by Bhumidhar/Asami from Scheduled Castes to non-Scheduled Castes; absence of such approval affects eligibility (p_8, p_14) (!) (!) - A lease deed executed without prior Collector approval cannot be treated as valid transfer under Section 157-A for purposes of land/land infrastructure scoring (p_13, p_14) (!) (!) - The case held that lease of land belonging to a Scheduled Caste person to a non-Scheduled Caste without Collector approval is not permissible, affecting eligibility in the IOC retail outlet advertisement (p_7, p_9, p_14) (!) (!) (!) - The judgment clarifies that Section 157-A applies to transfer by sale, gift, mortgage, or lease, not limited to agricultural land, requiring prior Collector approval (p_8, p_11) (!) (!) - The petition was dismissed; no interference due to lack of required approval (p_15) (!)

What is required for transfer or lease of land by a member of a Scheduled Caste under UP Zamindari and Land Reforms Act, 1950, Section 157-A?

What is the consequence of the Collector not granting prior approval under Section 157-A before execution of a lease deed?

What are the grounds on which marks/considerations for land and infrastructure can be denied in a retail outlet advertisement case when land belongs to a Scheduled Caste?


JUDGMENT

By the Court.—Heard Sri H.N. Singh for the petitioner and Sri Prakash Padia for the contesting respondents.

2. The petitioner was one of the applicants for a retail outlet in response to an advertisement issued by the Indian Oil Corporation on 11.9.2009. The petitioner, in support of having land, forwarded a copy of a registered lease deed in respect of area 0.2925 hectares of Khata No. 164, Plot No. 2436/5 situated in Mauja Sarenda Tehsil Kheragarh, District Agra, which was executed by one Gajadhar for a period of 20 years. When the application came up for consideration, the petitioner was held not to have obtained the necessary minimum marks as no marks were awarded for the land shown by the petitioner. Aggrieved, the petitioner approached this Court by filing Writ - C No. 29241 of 2010. The contention urged was that the marking was wrong. In the light of that, this Court, by its order dated 20.5.2010 directed the petitioner to file a representation and directed the respondents to decide the representation in accordance with law.

3. Petitioner thereafter filed one more writ petition being Writ - C No. 59016 of 2010, which was allowed by order dated 28.9.2010. The contention














Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top