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

2023 Supreme(All) 1957

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
Saurabh Lavania, J.
Sayyed Abbas - Petitioner
Versus
State of U.P. and others - Respondents
Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 88 of 2023
Decided On : 25-09-2023

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Rakesh Kumar Srivastava
For the Respondent: C.S.C., Ashish Verma and Rajeiu Kumar Tripathi

Grants made to minors under the U.P. Bhoodan Yagna Act are void ab initio, as minors do not qualify as 'landless agricultural labourers' under the law.

Headnote:(A) Uttar Pradesh Bhoodan Yagna Act, 1952 - Section 15-A - Cancellation of land Grant(s) - Petition challenging cancellation of Grants made to minor under U.P. Act No. 10 of 1953 on the ground of incompetence of authority and lack of adherence to procedural requirements dismissed - The Chief Revenue Officer acted within legal framework as he can exercise Collector's powers - Courts affirmed that minors cannot be deemed 'landless agricultural labourers' as per Act, rendering Grants void ab initio. (Paras 6, 11, 40, 46)

(B) Legal representation - The statutory power to cancel Grants requires proper authority; delays in action can impede justice but were rectified in this instance, grounding legality in established procedures. (Paras 18, 40, 46)

Facts of the case:
Grants given in 1982 and 1985 to the petitioner, then a minor, were cancelled in 2022 under Section 15-A based on claims of irregularity and failure to comply with procedural requirements.

Findings of Court:
The institution of proceedings under Section 15-A was valid; findings were based on undisputed facts about the petitioner's minority status and illegalities involved in the Grants.

Issues: Legitimacy of Grants to minors, authority to cancel, procedural adherence.

Ratio Decidendi: The Court confirmed the assertion that minors cannot be classified as 'landless agricultural labourers' who can receive Grants under U.P. Act No. 10 of 1953, and emphasized the legality of the Chief Revenue Officer's actions under the Act.

Result: The petition was dismissed with no costs.

Table of Content
1. challenge to cancellation of land grants (Para 2 , 4 , 5 , 6)
2. legal validity of land grants to minors (Para 11 , 39 , 47)
3. petitioner argues against regulatory authority (Para 18 , 19)
4. court upheld the authority of the chief revenue officer and the legality of the proceedings. (Para 20 , 21 , 22)
5. court found that the cancellation was justified despite procedural arguments. (Para 28 , 29)
6. procedure and inquiry under section 15-a (Para 30 , 37 , 41)
7. court dismissed the petition, affirming the legality of the cancellation orders. (Para 50)

JUDGMENT :

Saurabh Lavania, J.

Heard Sri Rakesh Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Hemant Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the State as also Sri Rajeiu Kumar Tripathi, learned counsel for the opposite party No. 4.

2. By means of present petition, the petitioner has challenged the order 28.12.2022 passed by the opposite party No. 2-Chief Revenue Officer, Sultanpur in Case No. 2714 of 2022, Computerized Case No. D202204680002714 (State v. Sayeed Abbas), which was instituted under Section 15 -A of the Uttar Pradesh Bhoodan Yagna Act, 1952 (in short ''U.P. Act No. 10 of 1953''), whereby, the Grant/Patta dated 19.6.1982 related to Plot No. 1178 M area 1 Biswa and 15 Biswansi, and Grant/Patta dated 2.9.1985 related to Plot No. 1178 M area 5 Biswansi, situate at Village-Goravarik Pargana-Meeranpur, Tehsil-Sadar, District-Sultanpur, has been cancelled.

3. Before entering into the merits of the case, I feel it appropriate to indicate that on 18.8.2023 the final order was dictated in open Court. However, on account of some confusion, at the time of signing of final order, regarding disposal of application seeking amendment, the case was again ordered to be listed vide order dated 18.8.2023 and thereafter on 15.9.2023, after hearing the learned counsel for the parties, the judgment was reserved.

4. Undisputed facts of the case are to the effect that the petitioner was minor, at the time of Grant(s), in issue, dated 19.6.1982 and 2.9.1985, respectively, which have been cancelled by the impugned order dated 28.12.2022. In particular, the petitioner was aged about 12 years old, at the time of providing first Grant dated 19.6.1982 and at the time of Grant dated 2.9.1985, he was 15 years old.

5. The property/land, in issue, was provided by virtue of these Grant(s) under the U.P. Act No. 10 of 1953, which was promulgated for specific purpose.

6. The part of property i.e. 1 Biswa obtained under the Act No. 10 of 1953 was transferred through sale-deed dated 17.7.2012 to Rehana Begum W/o Intzaar and on 5.2.2022 rest part of property i.e. 1 Biswa, was transferred to Ishratulla S/o Shahadatulla and Mohd. Khaleeq S/o Tahir Khan.

At this stage, this Court finds it appropriate to refer the judgment of this Court passed in the case of B.R. Nangia v. State of U.P. and others , 2011(10) ADJ 242 ; wherein this Court, after considering the aims and objects as also the relevant provision of U.P. Act No. 10 of 1953, observed that the grantee shall not be entitled to sublet or transfer the land and cannot use the land for the purpose other than it was granted. The relevant paras of the report are as under :

    ''7. Before coming to the question of non-observance of principle of natural justice, the pure legal question with respect to application of Section 131-B of Act, 1950 in respect to land governed by 1952 Act, I find it appropriate to deal with this issue first since it is a pure question of law and needs to be clarified by this Court.

    8. Act, 1952 was enacted to facilitate donation of land in connection with the Bhoodan Yagna initiated by Acharya Vinoba Bhave and to provide for settling of such land on the landless persons. The statute was enacted realizing certain difficulties faced in respect to donation of land by the persons having agricultural land in view of certain provisions of Act, 1950 and to overcome such difficulties. The statement of objects and reasons published with

    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 Back to top