LexGOHIL JESANGBHAI RAYSANGBHAI & ORS. versus STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2014) 3 S C.R. 110 A GOHIL JESANGBHAI RAYSANGBHAI & ORS. B c v STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR. (Civil Appeal No. 4123 of 2012) FEBRUARY 25, 2014 [SURINDER SINGH NIJJAR AND H.L. GOKHALE, JJ.] GUJARAT TENANCY AND AGRICULTURAL LANDS ACT, 1948: s. 43 rlw Government Resolution dated 4. 7.2008 - Restriction on transfer of agricultural land for non-agricultural purposes - Transfer of land with previous sanction of Collector and in consideration of such amount as State Government 0 may determine - Amount determined on the basis of rates called 'Jantri' on prior sanction to be obtained from Collector - Single Judge and Division Bench of High Court upholding the provision - Held: There is no reason to interfere with impugned judgments of High Court - Application uls s. 43 E cannot be kept pending indefinitely and, therefore, Collector is expected to decide such applications as far as possible within 90 days from its receipt, on the lines of the judgment in Patel Raghav Natha - State Government has reduced the levy from 80 to 40 per cent which is obviously quite reasonable - Application uls 43 speaks of previous sanction F -- Therefore, Jantri rate to be applied will be on the date of the sanction by Collector, and not on the date of the application made by the party - Bombay Paragana and Kulkarni Watans (Abolition) Act, 1950. G The instant appeals raised the questions with respect to the validity of s. 43 of the Gujarat Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 and Gujarat Government Resolution dated 4.7.2008, which placed restriction on transfer of agricultural lands by tenants for non- H 110 GOHIL JESANGBHAI RAYSANGBHAI & ORS. v. 111 STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR. agricultural purposes. It was contended that 80% of the A Jantri rates fixed for the lands, as prelJlium was violative of their rights under Art. 300A of the Constitution. The appeals also challenged the minimum valuation of land as per the rates contained in the "Jantri" prevalent since 20.12.2006. B Dismissing the appeals, the Court HELD: 1.1 The Gujarat Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 was passed as a part of the agrarian reform. The Act as such does not permit transfer of C agricultural land for non-agricultural purpose, and the same is barred u/s 63 thereof. That Section permits such a transfer only in certain contingencies as provided thereunder. Section 43 appears in Part Ill of Chapter Ill of the Act. Chapter Ill provides for special rights and D · privileges of tenants, and contains provisions for distribution of land for personal cultivation. Part Ill, thereof, provides for restrictions upon holding of land in excess of ceiling area. Section 43 has to be seen in this context. [para 6] [130-G-H; 131-A-B] E 1.2 The principal part of s. 43 lays down that the land which is purchased by a tenant under the various Sections referred to in s. 43 shall not be transferred in any manner except as permitted in s.43. The original s.43 did not contain any such exception. The Gujarat (Amendment) F Act No. XVI of 1960 introduced the words "on payment of such amount as the State Government may by general or special order determine" in s. 43. A Division Bench of the Gujarat High Court in Shashikant Mohanlal, upholding the constitutionality of the Section, held that the amount G as introduced under the Amendment was the charge which the State was seeking, for permitting the transfer since the occupancy right as. such was not transferable as of right. In the case of Patel Ambalal Gokalbhai, this Court held that the amendment of 1960 was protected H 112 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2014] 3 S.C.R. A under the 9th Schedule to the Constitution and, therefore, immune from any challenge. Subsequently, by Amendment Act No. XXX of 1977, the words "in consideration of payment of such amount..." came to be substituted in place of the words "on payment of such s amount ... " Thus, the Section permits such a transfer by the tenant after the appropriate amount, as determined by the State Government by a general or special order, is paid by way of consideration, and only after a previous sanction is obtained from the Collector for effecting the C transfer. Thus, the State Government has to lay down by general or special order the payment which is required to be made for such a transfer. If the agriculturist is seeking such a transfer, he has to make the necessary payment, and the transfer will be permitted o
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.