Munna vs State of M. P. - 2012 Supreme(MP) 292

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2012 Supreme(MP) 292

¼mPp U;k;ky;½ (HIGH COURT)
U;k- lqtkW; ikWy
Sujoy Paul, J.
eqUuk fo- e-Á- jkT; rFkk vU;
Munna v. State of M.P. and others
fjV ;kfpdk Øekad 8055] 2808] 4237] 4238] 4239] 5052] 5200] 5257] 5846] 6610] 7962] 7964 rFkk 8054 lu~ 2011 rFkk 1193] 1416 rFkk 1437] lu~ 2012 ¼Xokfy;j½(
fu.khZr fnukad 9-5-2012A
Writ Petition No. 8055, 2808, 4237, 4238, 4239, 5092, 5200, 5257, 5846, 6610, 7962, 7964 and 8054 of 2011 and 1193,1416 and 1437 of 2012 (Gwalior);
Decided on 9.5.2012.

Advocates:
;ksxs’k fla?ky] Mh-,l- pkSgku rFkk Jherh veh izoy ;kph dh vksj ls] ih-,l- j?kqoa’kh isuy odhy izR;FkhZ@jkT; dh vksj lsA
Yogesh Singhal, D.S. Chouhan and Smt. Ami Prabal for petitioner; P.S. Raghuvanshi, Panel Lawyer for respondent/State.

Headnote:¼1½ Hkw&jktLo lafgrk] 1959 ¼e-Á-½ & /kkjk 170&d rFkk 170&[k & mica/kksa dk mn~ns’; & ;g lqfuf’pr djuk gS fd vkfne tutkfr dh Hkwfe lafgrk dh vkKk ds izfrdwy varfjr ugha dh tkuk pkfg,A ¼iSjk 9
       ¼2½ Hkw&jktLo lafgrk] 1959 ¼e-Á-½ & /kkjk 170&d rFkk 170&[k & dk ykxw gksuk & vkfne tutkfr dk iV~Vk jn~n fd;k x;k & Hkwfe ljdkj dh Hkwfe ds :i esa vfHkfyf[kr & ckn esa ,slh Hkwfe dk ;kph ds i{k esa uohu iëk iznku fd;k x;k &uohu iV~Vk iznku djuk vkfne tutkfr rFkk xSj vkfne tutkfr ds chp esa varj.k dk laO;ogkj ugha gS & /kkjk 170&d rFkk 170&[k ds mica/k vkdf”kZr ugha gksrsA ¼iSjk 10 rFkk 11
       ¼3½ Hkw&jktLo lafgrk] 1959 ¼e-Á-½ & /kkjk 170&d rFkk 170&[k & dh O;kfIr & ;kph dks ljdkjh Hkwfe dk iV~Vk iznku fd;k x;k & Hkwfe dks ^Hkw nku* Hkwfe ekudj iV~Vk jn~n ugha fd;k tk ldrk & ^Hkw nku* Hkwfe bu mica/kksa dh lhek ds Hkhrj ugha vkrhA ¼iSjk 11 rFkk 13
       ¼4½ Hkw&jktLo lafgrk] 1959 ¼e-Á-½ & vuq- 1] fu- 18 & vkns’k & fu”d”kZ ij igqapus ds fy, & dkj.k fn;k tkuk pkfg,A ¼2010½ 9 ,l-lh-lh- 496 vuqlfjrA ¼iSjk 13
       ¼5½ U;k;ky; & dk dŸkZO; & U;kf;ddYi rFkk U;kf;d ‘kfä & dk iz;ksx & fu”d”kZ ij igqapus ds fy, & dkj.k fn, tkuk pkfg,A ¼2010½ 9 ,l-lh-lh- 496 vuqlfjrA ¼iSjk 13

       (1) Land Revenue Code, 1959 (M.P.) -- Ss. 170-A and 170-B -- object of the provisions -- is to ensure that land of tribal should not be transferred contrary to mandate of Code. [Para 9
       (2) Land Revenue Code, 1959 (M.P.) -- Ss. 170-A and 170-B -- applicability of -- patta of tribal cancelled -- land recorded as Government land -- later on fresh patta of such land granted in favour of petitioner -- grant of fresh patta is not transaction of transfer between tribal and non-tribal -- provisions of sections 170-A and 170-B not attracted. [Paras 10 and 11
       (3) Land Revenue Code, 1959 (M.P.) -- Ss. 170-A and 170-B -- scope of -- patta of Government land granted to petitioner -- cannot be cancelled treating the land as ‘Bhu Dan’ land -- ‘Bhu Dan’ land does not fall within the ambit of these provisions. [Paras 11 and 13
       (4) Land Revenue Code, 1959 (M.P.) -- Sch. 1, R. 18 -- order -- for arriving at conclusion -- reasons should be assigned. (2010) 9 SCC 496 followed. [Para 13
       (5)Court -- duty of -- quasi - judicial and judicial power -- exercise of -- for arriving at conclusion -- reasons should be assigned. (2010) 9 SCC 496 followed. [Para 13

ORDER

1. Learned counsel for the parties submit that the matters are identical in nature. Accordingly, with the consent of parties, matters are analogously heard and decided by this common order.

2. The facts are taken from Writ Petition No. 8055/2011 (Munna vs. State of M.P. and others).

3. The land Survey No. 540540/1 area 0.836 hectare is situated at village Bhagwaj, District Sheopur. This land was earlier allotted to a tribal person namedy Fundya, resident of said village. However, the patta of said land was cancelled by the S.D.O. Sheopur in Case No. 24/94-95/A-86 Vide order dated 22.12.1995 and 16.8.1994. The order is placed on record as Annexure P/3.

4. After cancellation of patta the land became Government land and therefter in case No. 06/96-97/A-99 the land was settled by granting patta in favour of the petitioner. Thereafter the petitioner is cultivating the land on the basis of said patta. Accordingly, the petitioner is recorded in revenue record as “Government Patta Holder”. The revenue entries are marked as Annexure P/4.

5. The Sub-Divisional Officer issued a notice dated 26.10.2020 to the petitioner by invoking sections 170-A and 170-B of M.P. Land Revenue Code (MPLRC). Petitioner submitted his reply in the said suo motu proceedings initiated by the Sub-Divisional Officer. Thereafter by order dated 28.2.2011 (Annexure P/2) the attotment of the petitioner was cancelled by S.D.O. The petitioner preferred an appeal before the Collector, which was registered as Case No. 15/2010-11/Appeal Revenue, which was decided by him on 8.11.2011 (Annexure P/1). The Collector also rejected the appeal of the petitioner.

6. Shri Yogesh Singhal, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that patta in favour of the petitioner was not granted on cancellation or transfer of patta from a tribal person. He submits that patta of a tribal person was cancelled, the land became a Government land and then after following due process of law, patta was granted in his favour. He submits that section 170-A and 170-B have no application in the facts and circumstances of the case. He futher submits that another reason assigned for cancellation of land in the impugned order is that after 1992 ‘Bhu Dan Board’ was abolished and the land with regard to ‘Bhu Dan’ should not have been given on patta to the petitioner. Shri Singhal submits that this was not the reason assigned in the show cause notice nor any provision is quoted, on the strength of which such a conclusion is arrived at by the S.D.O. He further submits that even this reason does not fall within the ambit of sections 170-A and 170-B of the MPLRC.

7. Per Contra, Shri P.S. Raghuvanshi, learned Panel Lawyer supported the order passed by the authorities.

8. I have bestowed my anxious consideration on the rival contentions of the parties.

9. For ready perusal, sections 170-A and 170-B of MPLRC are reproduced as under:-

“170-A. Certain transfers to be set aside. -

(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in the Limitation Act, 1963 (No. 36 of 1963)), the Sub-Divisional Officer may, on his own motion or on an application made by a transferer of agricultural land belonging to a tribe which has been declared to be an aboriginal tribe under sub-section (6) of section 165 on or before the 31st December, 1978, enquire into a transfer effected by way of sale, or in pursuance of a decree of a Court of such land to a person not belonging to such tribe or transfer effected by way of accrual of right of occupancy tenant under section 169 or of bhumiswami under-section (2-A) of section 190 at any time during the period commencing on the 2nd October, 1959 and ending on the date of commencement of the Madhya Pradesh Land Revenue Code (Third Amendment) Act, 1976 to satisfy himself as to the bona fide nature of such transfer.

(2) If the Sub-Divisional Officer on an enquiry and after giving a reasonable opportunity to the persons owning any interest in such land, is satisfied that such transter was not bona fide, he may not

Click Here to Read the rest of this document