Supreme Court Upholds Vesting of Land in State for Violation of Scheduled Tribe Land Transfer Restrictions. Exchange of Land by Scheduled Tribe Member Without Prior Permission and in Disproportionate Value is Void Under U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950.

  • 11
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The case involves an appeal by the Additional Commissioner, Revenue and others against the judgment of the Uttarakhand High Court which set aside orders of revenue authorities declaring an exchange of land void. The respondents, Akhalaq Hussain and Saqir Hussain, entered into a registered exchange deed on 16.03.1994 with Mangal Singh, a member of the Scheduled Tribe. The respondents gave 4½ Muthi (56.25 sq.mtrs.) of land in village Vim Patti and received 12 Nali (2400 sq.mtrs.) of agricultural land in village Mall Ghorpatta. The Tehsildar initially allowed mutation on 25.04.1994. However, on 19.07.2000, the Assistant Collector/Pargana Magistrate issued an order under Section 167 of the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950 (U.P. ZA & LR Act), holding that the exchange violated Section 161(1) as no prior permission was obtained, and that the land vested in the State Government. The respondents' appeal and revision were dismissed by the Additional Judicial Commissioner on 30.06.2001 and the Additional Commissioner (Revenue) on 02.07.2002, respectively. The High Court, in writ petition, allowed the respondents' challenge, holding that Sections 161 and 157-B do not apply to exchanges made by registered deed. The Supreme Court reversed the High Court's decision. The Court held that Section 157-B imposes a complete bar on transfer of land by Scheduled Tribe members to non-Scheduled Tribe persons, and exchange is a transfer covered by the phrase 'or otherwise'. Further, Section 161 requires prior permission for exchange, and failure to obtain it renders the exchange void under Section 166. The Court also noted that the exchange was grossly disproportionate (56.25 sq.mtrs. for 2400 sq.mtrs.), indicating it was a sale in disguise. The limitation period of six years under Appendix-III was satisfied as proceedings began in 2000. The Court restored the orders of the revenue authorities, vesting the land in the State.

Headnote

A) Land Laws - Transfer by Scheduled Tribe - Section 157-B U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950 - Complete Bar - Exchange of land by a Scheduled Tribe member to a non-Scheduled Tribe person is a transfer and is prohibited under Section 157-B, which bars sale, gift, mortgage, lease or otherwise any land to a person not belonging to Scheduled Tribe - Held that the exchange deed is void under Section 166 (Paras 11-13).

B) Land Laws - Exchange of Land - Section 161 U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950 - Prior Permission - A bhumidhar can exchange his land with another bhumidhar only after obtaining prior permission from the Assistant Collector - Failure to obtain such permission renders the exchange void - Held that the High Court erred in holding that Section 161 does not apply to registered exchange deeds (Paras 14-16).

C) Land Laws - Vesting of Land - Section 167 U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950 - Consequence of Void Transfer - Where a transfer is void under Section 166, the land vests in the State Government from the date of transfer - Held that the Assistant Collector's order vesting the land in the State was valid (Paras 17-18).

D) Land Laws - Limitation - Appendix-III Item No.20 U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950 - Proceedings under Section 161 - Limitation period of six years from the date of transfer applies - Held that the proceedings initiated in 2000 were within limitation as the transfer was in 1994 (Para 19).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the exchange deed dated 16.03.1994 is in contravention of the provisions of U.P. ZA & LR Act in view of complete bar for the transfer of land by a member of Scheduled Tribe under Section 157-B of the U.P. ZA & LR Act? Whether the High Court was right in saying that permission required under Section 161 of the U.P. ZA & LR Act is not a requisite condition for the exchange of land?

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

Appeal allowed. Impugned judgment of the High Court dated 18.09.2008 set aside. Orders of the Assistant Collector/Pargana Magistrate dated 19.07.2000, Additional Judicial Commissioner dated 30.06.2001, and Additional Commissioner (Revenue) dated 02.07.2002 restored. The land admeasuring 12 Nali under Khata No.43 stands vested in the State Government from the date of transfer. Respondents directed to remove all movable/immovable properties within thirty days.

Law Points

  • Section 157-B of U.P. ZA & LR Act imposes complete bar on transfer of land by Scheduled Tribe members to non-Scheduled Tribe persons
  • exchange is a transfer
  • Section 161 requires prior permission for exchange
  • Section 166 declares void transfers in contravention
  • Section 167 provides for vesting of land in State
  • limitation period under Appendix-III is six years from date of transfer
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2020 LawText (SC) (3) 74

Civil Appeal No.7346 of 2010

2020-03-03

R. Banumathi

Additional Commissioner Revenue and Others

Akhalak Hussain and Another

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Civil appeal against High Court judgment setting aside revenue authorities' orders declaring exchange of land void and ordering vesting in State.

Remedy Sought

Appellants sought restoration of orders of revenue authorities vesting the land in the State.

Filing Reason

Respondents exchanged land with a Scheduled Tribe member without prior permission and in violation of Section 157-B and 161 of U.P. ZA & LR Act.

Previous Decisions

Assistant Collector/Pargana Magistrate order dated 19.07.2000 under Section 167; Additional Judicial Commissioner order dated 30.06.2001 dismissing appeal; Additional Commissioner (Revenue) order dated 02.07.2002 dismissing revision; High Court judgment dated 18.09.2008 allowing writ petition.

Issues

Whether the exchange deed dated 16.03.1994 is in contravention of the provisions of U.P. ZA & LR Act in view of complete bar for the transfer of land by a member of Scheduled Tribe under Section 157-B of the U.P. ZA & LR Act? Whether the High Court was right in saying that permission required under Section 161 of the U.P. ZA & LR Act is not a requisite condition for the exchange of land?

Submissions/Arguments

Appellants: Sections 157-B and 161 impose a complete bar on transfer of land by Scheduled Tribe members to non-Scheduled Tribe persons; exchange is a transfer; prior permission is mandatory; High Court exceeded its jurisdiction under Article 227. Respondents: Land is not agricultural land under Section 3(14); provisions of U.P. ZA & LR Act do not apply; failure to seek permission under Section 161 cannot result in vesting under Section 167; Pargana Adhikari lacked jurisdiction; ex-parte order without hearing is unsustainable; proceedings barred by limitation of six years under Appendix-III.

Ratio Decidendi

Section 157-B of U.P. ZA & LR Act imposes a complete bar on transfer of land by Scheduled Tribe members to non-Scheduled Tribe persons, and exchange is a transfer covered by the phrase 'or otherwise'. Section 161 requires prior permission for exchange, and failure to obtain it renders the exchange void under Section 166. Consequently, the land vests in the State under Section 167. The limitation period of six years under Appendix-III is satisfied.

Judgment Excerpts

Section 157-B imposes a complete bar on the right of a bhumidhar or asami belonging to the Scheduled Tribe to transfer their land by way of sale, gift, mortgage or otherwise to a person not belonging to the Scheduled Tribe. The exchange deed is in contravention of the provisions of the U.P. ZA & LR Act and hence void. The High Court erred in holding that the provisions of Sections 161 and 157-B of the Act do not apply in case of exchange of the land.

Procedural History

Respondents exchanged land with Mangal Singh (Scheduled Tribe) on 16.03.1994 via registered deed. Mutation allowed on 25.04.1994. On 19.07.2000, Assistant Collector/Pargana Magistrate issued order under Section 167 declaring exchange void and vesting land in State. Respondents appealed; Additional Judicial Commissioner dismissed appeal on 30.06.2001. Revision before Additional Commissioner (Revenue) dismissed on 02.07.2002. Respondents filed writ petition in High Court; High Court allowed writ petition on 18.09.2008. Appellants appealed to Supreme Court.

Acts & Sections

  • Uttar Pradesh Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950: 3(14), 153, 154, 155, 156, 157, 157-B, 161, 166, 167, Appendix-III Item No.20
  • Indian Stamp Act, 1899: Article 31, Article 32 of Schedule 1-B
  • Constitution of India: Article 227
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Upholds Vesting of Land in State for Violation of Scheduled Tribe Land Transfer Restrictions. Exchange of Land by Scheduled Tribe Member Without Prior Permission and in Disproportionate Value is Void Under U.P. Zamindari Abolition and L...
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Allows State Appeals in Land Acquisition Lapse Case — Period of Interim Stay Must Be Excluded Under Section 11A of Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The Court held that the High Court erred in not excluding the period of interim stay while ...