1. Challenge to refusal to certify mutation entry for land converted from new to old tenure under Gujarat Agricultural Land Ceiling Act. (Para 2 )
Back
Next 
2026 Supreme(Online)(Guj) 4969
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
Divyesh A. Joshi, J
Dadbhai Amrubhai Varu – Appellant
Versus
State of Gujarat – Respondent
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8841 of 2014
Advocates:
For the Appellants/ Petitioners: Amar D Mithani, Premal S Rachh, Aditya P. Mistri
For the Respondents: Jay Trivedi
For the Appellants/ Petitioners: Amar D Mithani, Premal S Rachh, Aditya P. Mistri
For the Respondents: Jay Trivedi
Land converted from new tenure to old tenure loses its restrictive transfer conditions. Under Section 135-C of the Gujarat Land Revenue Code, revenue authorities must certify mutation entries based on registered sale deeds, as the registered document exempts the acquirer from reporting obligations.
Headnote:(A) Gujarat Land Revenue Code - Sections 135-C and 135-D - Gujarat Agricultural Land Ceiling Act, 1960 - Sections 29 and 30 - Mutation entry based on registered sale deed - Refusal to certify mutation entry on grounds of restricted tenure - Land converted from new tenure to old tenure via Government Resolution dated 10.05.2001 and order dated 26.07.2004 - Once land is converted from new tenure to old tenure, restrictions imposed under the relevant enactments are lifted - Under Section 135-C, a person acquiring right by virtue of a registered document is exempted from the obligation to report to the designated officer - The designated officer is bound to enter the name of the claimant/owner on the basis of a registered document and cannot disregard the legal effect of a registered sale deed. (Paras 4.2, 6.2, 6.3)
Facts of the case:
Land originally granted to Rajula Taluka Anusuchit Jati Samudayik Mandali under Section 29 of the Gujarat Agricultural Land Ceiling Act, 1960, on new tenure (restricted). The land was converted to old tenure in 2004 following a Government Resolution. Subsequently, the society sold the land to one Shardaben Prafullabhai Godhani via a registered sale deed. The petitioners then purchased a parcel of this land from her through another registered sale deed. The revenue authorities refused to certify mutation entry No. 5426, claiming the land remained restricted tenure and requires prior permission for transfer. This refusal was upheld by the Deputy Collector, Collector, and Special Secretary (Appeals).
Findings of Court:
The court found that the land had been legally converted to old tenure, and the subsequent transfers were based on registered sale deeds. The revenue authorities failed to appreciate that converted land no longer carries the restrictions of new tenure for agricultural use, and statutory provisions mandate mutation entries for registered documents.
Issues: Whether the revenue authorities were justified in refusing to certify the mutation entry of the petitioners on the ground that the land was originally of restricted tenure, despite its subsequent conversion to old tenure and the existence of registered sale deeds.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that upon conversion of land from new tenure to old tenure, restrictions on transfer under the Ceiling Act cease to exist. Furthermore, under Section 135-C of the Gujarat Land Revenue Code, the designated officer is legally obligated to mutate the name of a purchaser who holds a registered sale deed, as the registered document itself recognizes the legal effect of the transfer.
Result: Petition allowed.
Legal Category Hierarchy
- property law
- administrative law
-
statutory interpretation
- section 135-c gujarat land revenue code
- section 29 gujarat agricultural land ceiling act (Para 4)
Table of Contents
2. Petitioners argue conversion lifted restrictions; State argues original grant required prior permission for subsequent transfers. (Para 4 , 5 )
3. Land converted to old tenure prior to resolution; earlier restrictions ceased. Mutation based on registered sale deed is mandatory. (Para 6 )
4. Petition allowed. Impugned orders quashed. Revenue authority directed to mutate entry based on registered sale deed. (Para 7 , 8 )
5. Is a mutation entry conclusive proof of title?
No. Mutation entries are primarily made for fiscal purposes and do not decide ownership or title. (Para 6 )
ORAL JUDGMENT
1) By way of filing the present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have prayed for the following reliefs:
"(A) be pleased to issue a writ of certiorari or a writ in the nature of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction quashing and setting aside the order passed by respondent no. 4 on 18.9.2010 refusing to certify mutation entry No. 5426 in favour of petitioners endorsed in the revenue record and same is reflected in Village Form No. 6 at Annexure-A to this petition, order dated 9.4.2013 passed by respondent no. 3 in Appeal Case No. 8/2011-12 at Annexure-B to this petition, order dated 22.8.2013 passed by respondent No.2 rejecting the appeal preferred by the petitioners being Case No. 89 of 2013 at Annexure-C to this petition and the order passed by respondent No.1 in Revision Application No.82 of 2013 dated 10.4.2014 at Annexure-D to this petition;
(B) Pending admission and final disposal of this petition, Your Lordships will be pleased to stay further execution, operation and implementation of the order passed by respondent No. 4 on 18.9.2010 refusing to enter mutation entry No. 5426 mutated in the revenue record i.e. Village Form No. 6 in favour of the petitioners at Annexure-A to this petition, order dated 9.4.2013 passed by respondent No. 3 in Appeal Case No. 8/2011-12 at Annexure-B to this petition, order dated 22.8.2013 passed by respondent No. 2 rejecting the appeal preferred by the petitioners being Case No. 89 of 2013 at Annexure-C to this petition and the order passed by respondent No. 1 in Revision Application No. 82 of 2013 dated 10.4.2014 at Annexure-D to this petition;
(C) Be pleased to award the cost of this petition;
(D) Such other and further relief that is just, fit and expedient in the facts and circumstances of the case may be granted."
2) The case of the petitioners can be summarised in a nutshell as under:
2.1) The petitioners state that land bearing Survey No.171 paiki 90, admeasuring 4 Hectares, 04 Are and 70 square meters situated at Village Katar, Taluka Rajula, District Amreli was originally allotted to Rajula Taluka Anusuchit Jati Samudayik Mandali under the provisions of Section 29 of the Gujarat Agricultural Land Ceiling Act, 1960. The land was granted to the Rajula Taluka Anusuchit Jati Samudayik Mandali in the year 1983 and entry was accordingly mutated in the revenue record and subsequently certified by the competent revenue authority.
2.2) In the year 2001, the Government of Gujarat passed a Resolution dated 10.05.2001 providing for conversion of land from new tenure to old tenure. Pursuant to which the concerned revenue authority initiated proceedings and issued notice to the said Mandali on 10.05.2004 for conversion of the said land from new tenure to old tenure. The society agreed to accept the terms and conditions imposed by the concerned authorities and paid the required premium amount. Consequently, the Deputy Collector, Rajula passed order on 26.07.2004 converting the land from new tenure to old tenure pursuant to which an entry has been mutated in the revenue record. Thereafter, the said Mandali has sought permission from the District Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Amreli, to sell the said land, pursuant to which on 27.07.2004, the Registrar has granted permission to the Mandali to sell the said land. Pursuant to which society has entered into the sale transactions with one lady named Shardaben Prafullabhai Godhani by way of executing a registered sale deed pursuant to which an entry had already been mutated in the revenue record vide Entry No. 5196 and subsequently, certified by the competent revenue authority.
2.3) On the strength of the execution of the registered sale deed, Shardaben Prafullabhai Godhani became the absolute owner and occupant of the said property. Thereafter, on 14.05.2010, the present petitioners herein purchased a certain parcel of the said land from Shardaben Prafullabhai Godhani by wa
