MANOREY @ MANOHAR versus BOARD OF REVENUE (U.P.) AND ORS.

Citation: [2003] 3 S.C.R. 274 · Decided: 02-04-2003 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: K.G. BALAKRISHNAN · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
MANOREY @ MANOHAR 
v. 
BOARD OF REVENUE (U.P.) AND ORS. 
APRIL :?., 2003 
B 
[K.G. BALAKRISHNAN AND P. VENKATARAMA REDD!, JJ.] 
land Reforms : 
UP. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950-Sections 
C l 228(4F) and 195-Applicant agricultural labourer belonging to scheduled 
caste, cultivating piece of land for 14-15 years-Gaon Sabha leasing land to 
others-Applicant filing application for recognition of rights and amendment 
in revenue records-Maintainability of-Held, Section 122 B(4F) protects the 
possession and also confers positive right of Bhumidhars on the occupant of 
D land satisfaing the criteria mentioned-Thus applicant entitled to protection 
of his rights-Since applicant is deemed to be admitted as Bhumidhar with 
non-transferable rights under Section 195 as good as statutorily recognized 
Bhumidhar which obviates need to approach Gaon Sabha, he is entitled to 
seek correction of revenue records. 
E 
Appellant an agricultural labourer belongs to Scheduled Caste. He 
had been cultivating a piece of land for about 14-15 years. The said land 
was leased out to the respondent by Gaon Sabha treating the land as fallow 
land. The Sub-Divisional Officer (SDO) approved the said allotment. 
Appellant apprehended eviction and filed an application for protection of 
F his rights under Section 1228 (4F) of U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land 
Reforms Act, 1950 and for necessary amendments to be made in the 
revenue records. SDO held that rights over the land accrued to the 
appellant, therefore, directed his name to be recorded as Bhumidhar with 
non-transferable right by deleting the name of Gaon Sabha in the records. 
Appellate authority upheld the order. However, both the Board of Revenue 
G and High Court set aside the order on the ground of non-maintainability 
of such application. Hence the present appeal. 
Allowing the appeal, the Court 
HELD: 1. Sub-section (4F) of Section 1228 of the U.P. Zamindari 
H 
274 
--· 
MANOREY @MANOHAR v. BOARD OF REVENUE (U.P) 
275 
Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950 not merely provides shield to A 
protect the possession, but it also confers a positive right of Bhumidhar on 
the occupant of the land satisfying the criteria laid down in that sub-
section. It carves out an exception in favour of an agricultural labourer 
belonging to a Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe having land below the 
ceiling of 3.125 acres. Irrespective of the circumstances in which such B 
eligible person occupied the land vested in Gaon Sabha (other than the 
land mentioned in Section 132), no action to evict him shall be taken and 
moreover, he shall be deemed to have been admitted as a Bhumidhar with 
non transferable rights over the land under Section 195, provided he 
satisfies the conditions specified in the sub-section. The deeming provision 
has been specifically enacted as a measure of agrarian reform, with a C 
thrust on socio-economic justice. In the instant case, the appellant satisfies 
the conditions and thus shall not be evicted by taking recourse to sub-
sections (I) to (3) of Section 1228 and is entitled to safeguard his possession 
as against the Gaon Sabha. 1279-A-DI 
Ramdin v. Board of Revenue, 119941 Revenue Decisions 388, referred D 
to. 
1.2. Section 195 lays down that the Land Management Committee, 
with the previous approval of the Assistant Collector in-charge of the Sub 
Division, shall have the right to admit any person as Bhumidhar with non-
transferable rights to any vacant land (other than the land falling under E 
Section I 32) vested in the Ga on Sabha. Section 198 prescribes 'the order 
of preference in admitting persons to land under Sections 195 and 197'. 
The last part of sub-section (4F) of Section 1228 confers, by a statutory 
fiction, the status of Bhumidhar with non transferable rights en the eligible 
occupant of the land as ifhe has been admitted as such under Section 195 F 
to which full effect must be given. In substance and in effect the deeming 
provision declares that the statutorily recognized Bhumidhar should be as 
good as a person admitted to Bhumadhari rights under Section 195 read 
with other provisions. In a way, sub-section (4F) supplements Section I 95 
by specifically granting the same benefit to a person coming within the 
protective umbrella of that sub-section. The need to approach the Gaon G 
Sabha under Section 195 read with Section 198 is obviated by the deeming 
provision contained in sub-section (4F). Thus there is no warrant to 
c

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.