Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

1969 (4) TMI 90

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... order to appreciate the contentions raised before us it is necessary to set out a few facts. The petitioner was a resident of the State of Rajkot and at an auction effected by the State, he acquired on or about September 22, 1938, agricultural land bearing survey No. 417 which in all measured about 12 acres and 12 ganthas. After some acquisitions by the State out of this survey number he was left with 2 acres and 10 ganthas of agricultural land. On October 20, 1958, the petitioner applied to the Collector for permission to convert this land to non-agricultural use, under s. 65 of the Bombay Land Revenue Code, 1879, hereinafter referred to as the Code. This petition was first rejected by the Collector, but the Divisional Commissioner remanded the matter to the Collector. On remand, the then Collector of Rajkot, after holding an enquiry, granted permission to the petitioner to use the land for non-agricultural use by his order dated July 2, 1960. Pursuant to this order a sanad was issued by the Collector to the petitioner on July 27, 1960. It appears that the sanad was amended on November 3, 1960 and December 1, 1960. The sanad was in form MI and a number of conditions were appended .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e Commissioner had erred in law in allowing the question to be agitated before him which were not agitated before the Collector and which involved considerations which were completely foreign to those which were actually before the Collector. While dealing with ground No. 1 the learned Judge held that the Commissioner had no jurisdiction to pass an order which would nullify the sanad, and that the sanad was binding on both the parties till it was set aside in due course of law. On the second ground he held that there was some force in the submission. But he observed : "But at the same time if I had to decide this case on this contention raised, I may not have interfered only on this ground, with the decision of the Commissioner". On the third ground he found that it was true that the question of title was agitated by the Municipal Committee for the first time before the Commissioner, though it was primarily for the petitioner to show that he was an occupant within the meaning of s. 65 of the Code. But then the learned Judge decided not to enter into the merits of the case as he had come to the clear conclusion that the Commissioner had no authority to pass the order that he d .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ation within a period of three months, the permission applied for shall be deemed to have been granted; such period shall, if the Collector sends a written acknowledgment with- in seven days from the date of receipt of the application, be reckoned from the date of the acknowledgment, but in any other case it shall be reckoned from the date of receipt of the application. Unless the Collector shall in particular instances otherwise direct, no such application shall be recognized except it be made by the occupant. When any such land is thus permitted to be used for any purpose unconnected with agriculture it shall be lawful for the Collector, subject to the general order of the State Government, to require the payment of a fine in addition to any new assessment which may be leviable under the provisions of section 48. 66. If any such land be so used without the permission of the Collector being first obtained, or before the expiry of the period prescribed by section 65, the occupant and any tenant, or other person holding under or through him, shall be liable to be summarily evicted by the Collector from the land so used and from the entire field or survey number of which it may .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... chedule hereto and indicated by the letters...... on the site plan annexed hereto, forming part of survey No. 417 and measuring acres 2 gunthas 17, be the same a little more or less. When used under rule 51 for land already occupied for agricultural purposes within certain surveyed cities the period for which the assessment is leviable will be ordered to coincide with the expiry of 99 years' period running in that city. Now this is to certify that permission to use for building purposes, the said plot is hereby granted subject to the provisions of the said code, and on the following conditions, namely :- (1) Assessment...... (6) Code provisions applicable ':-Save except as herein provided, the grant shall be subject to the provisions of this code In witness whereof the Collector of has set his hand and the seal of his office on behalf of the Governor of Bombay, and the applicant has also here-unto set his hand, this day the of 19 . Signature of Applicant Signature and designations of witnesses Signature of Collector Signature and designations of witnesses We declare that who has signed this notice is, to our personal knowledge, the person he represents himself to be .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the proceedings of any subordinate revenue officer, for the purpose of satisfying itself or himself, as the case may be, as to the legality or property of any decision or order passed, and as to the regularity of the proceedings of such officer. The following officers may in the same manner call for and examine the proceedings of any officer subordinate (1) [1964] 7 S.C.R. 103 (1) The Government of the Province of Bombay v. Hormusji Manekji--(1940) Letters Patent Appeal No. 40 of 1938, decided on August 8, 1940. (2) The Government of Bombay v. Mathurdas Laljibhai Gandhi-44 B.L.R. 405. (3) The State of Bombay v. Chhaganlal Gangaram Lavar-56 B.L.R. 1084. (4) Government of Bombay v. Ahmedabad sarangpur mills Co.-A.I.R. 1944 Bom. 244. (5) Secretary of State v. Anant Nulkar-36 B.L.R. 242 (P.C.) (6) Province of Bombay v. Hormusji Manekji- 50 B.L.R. 524 (P.C.). to them in any matter in which neither a formal nor a summary inquiry has been held, namely,.... a Mam-latdar, a Mahalkari, an Assistant Superintendent of Survey and an Assistant Settlement Officer. If in any case it shall appear to the State Government or to such officer aforesaid that any decision or order or .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates