IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Anjani Kumar Mishra, J.
Rajeshwari - Petitioner
Versus
Commissioner Additiuonal Commissioner And Others - Respondents
Writ - C No. - 267 of 2019
Decided On : 04-12-2019
Permission - Land Acquisition - The court dismissed the writ petition seeking to quash orders for land vesting in the State due to lack of prior permission for sale deed under Section 157AA of the U.P Z. A. and Land Reforms Act. The court held that permission is required for sale by a member of scheduled caste to another scheduled caste only, and it cannot be granted ex post facto. The determination of order of preference under Section 157-AA has to be made prior to the sale deed or at best on the date of sale deed.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought a writ of certiorari to quash orders for land vesting in the State due to lack of prior permission for sale deed under Section 157AA of the U.P Z. A. and Land Reforms Act.
Finding of the Court:
The court dismissed the writ petition, holding that permission is required for sale by a member of scheduled caste to another scheduled caste only, and it cannot be granted ex post facto.
Issues: The issues revolved around the requirement of prior permission for sale deed under Section 157AA of the U.P Z. A. and Land Reforms Act and the applicability of this requirement to scheduled caste members.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that permission is required for sale by a member of scheduled caste to another scheduled caste only, and it cannot be granted ex post facto. The determination of order of preference under Section 157-AA has to be made prior to the sale deed or at best on the date of sale deed.
Final Decision: The writ petition was dismissed as without merit.
JUDGMENT :
1. Heard counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents.
2. The petition arises out of proceedings under Section 157AA/166/167 of the U.P Z. A. and Land Reforms Act and seeks a writ of certiorari for quashing the orders dated 28.10.2016 passed by the respondent no.2 whereby certain land purchased by the petitioner has been ordered to vest in the State as the sale deed was executed by the vendor without having obtained prior permission contemplated under Section 157AA of the Act.
3. The order dated 17.10.2018 whereby the consequential appeal has been dismissed by the respondent no.1 is also impugned.
4. Admittedly one Roogan executed a registered sale deed on 05.03.2013 of 1/5th part of plot no. 429 situated in Village and Post Meerpurhindu, Tehsil & District Ghaziabad in favour of petitioner. It is also not in dispute that the vendor had obtained this land on patta and had become its bhumidhari with transferable rights, in accordance with Section 131 B of U.P. Z. A. and L. R. Act. It is also not in dispute that no prior permission have been obtained before executing the sale deed as is required by Section 157AA of the Act.
5. The contention of the petitioner before this Court as also before the Court below is that since both vendor and vendee belong to the scheduled caste, no permission was required for executing the sale deed.
6. This argument has been considered and repelled in the judgment dated 10.08.2015 passed in Writ-C No. 4406 of 2015, Amichandra Vs. State of U.P. and 2 others. The relevant portion of the said judgment is extracted herein below:-
7. The contention therefore raised by the counsel for the petitioner is without merit.
8. The second question is whether the permission required under Section 157AA can be granted Ex Post Facto. In my considered opinion, the permission cannot be granted Ex Post Facto because the permission contemplated by Section 157AA is for sale by a member of scheduled caste to another scheduled caste only. However, amongst scheduled caste who can purchase land, whose vendor has become bhumidhar with transferable rights under Section 131 B, is to be determined in the order of preference provided by the section itself. In this regard, again it would be relevant to refer to the judgment of Amichandra (supra) wherein it has been observed:-
.................
It therefore necessarily follows that before a transfer is effected, it has to be determined as to the category under which the prospective vendee falls and whether another person of the Scheduled Caste, who is in a higher preferential category is available or not. This determination has to be made and duly recorded prior to the transfer itself.
It is in this context that sub-section (4) has been introduced which mandates that in case, a person is entitled to execute a sale-deed, etc. in favour of person(s) belonging to the Scheduled Caste, such transfer s
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.