OM PRAKASH AGARWAL AND ORS. versus BATARA BEHERA AND ORS.

Citation: [1999] 1 S.C.R. 969 · Decided: 10-03-1999 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: G.B. PATTANAIK · Disposal: Dismissed

Cited by 1 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

> 
OM PRAKASH AGARWAL AND ORS. 
v. 
BATARA BEHERA AND ORS. 
MARCH 10, 1999 
[G.B. PATTANAIK AND M.B. SHAH, JJ.) 
Tenancy and Land Laws : 
Orissa Land Refonns Act, 1960 : 
Sections 2(14) and 73(c)-Land-Situated within municipal area or in 
villages or in an urban agglomeration-Applicability of Act-Held, the Act 
applies to all such lands which are being either used or capable or being used 
for agiicultural purposes. 
A 
B 
c 
Sections 22( I) and 23(2)-Sub-Divisional Officer, on the basis of D 
mate1ials produced before him, concluded that vendors of the sale deeds 
belonged to the Scheduled Caste-Such conclusion not challenged before 
Appellate Auth01ity-Held, finding is final and cannot be pmnitted to be 
re-agi,tated again-Hence, High Coult did not consider the said question 
lightly-There[ ore, the said question cannot be re-opened before the Supreme 
~~ 
E 
Words and Phrases : 
"Land''--Meaning of-In the context of S. 2( 14) of the Orissa Land 
Refonns Act, 1960. 
The agricultural laud situated within the municipal limits was sold 
F 
to the appellants by a Registered Sale Deed in favour of non-scheduled 
caste persons by persons alleged to be belonging to Scheduled Casts. 
Respondent No. 1 who was a co- sharer of the vendors of the aforesaid Sale 
Deed filed petition before the Revenue Ollicer under Section 23 of the G 
Orissa Land Reforms Act, 1960 on the ground that the transfer in question 
was in contravention of Section 22(1) of the Act and, therefore, the vendors 
should be put back in possession. 
The Revenue Officer came to the conclusion that the vendors 
belonged to the Scheduled Caste and that the lands in !JUestion could be H 
969 
970 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[1999] 1 S.C.R. 
A governed by the Act although the said land was situated within the 
municipal limits. The Additional Distrkt. Magistrate dismissed the ap-
peal. However, the Special Officer, Land Reforms allowed the revision on 
the ground that the Act did not apply to the land in question. Respondent 
No. 1 filed a writ petition before the High Court challenging the aforesaid 
B order, which was allowed. Hence this appeal. 
c 
On behalf of the appellant it was contended that in the absence of 
any materials to indicate that the vendors belonged to the Schedule Caste 
the embargo under Section 22 of the Act would not apply and, therefore, 
the application under Section 23 was not tenable. 
Dismissing the appeal, this Court 
HELD : 1. The Orissa Land Reforms Act, 1960, no doubt, is a 
measure relating to agrarian reforms and land tenures and abolition of 
intermediary interest but there is no provision in the Act which excludes 
) 
D such agricultural lands merely because they are situated in an Urban 
"" 
Agglomeration. The Act applies to all land, which is either used, or capable 
of being used for agricultural purposes irrespective of whether it is 
situated within a municipal area or in villages. The very object of the 
legislation being agrarian reform, the object will be frustrated if agricul-
E tural lands within the municipal area are excluded from the purview of the 
Act. [972-G] 
2. The Sub-Divisional Officer on the basis of materials produced 
before him came to a positive conclusion that the vendors of the sale deeds 
belong to Schedule Caste. Since this finding of the Sub-Divisional Officer 
F had not been assailed before the Appellate Authority, the said finding has 
become final and cannot be permitted to be re-agitated again. Rightly, 
therefore, the High Court did not consider the said question and that 
question cannot be re-opened before this Court. [973-B-C] 
G 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 121 of 
1986. 
From the Judgment and Order dated 4.7.85 of the Orissa High Court 
in O.J.C. No. 321 of 1984. 
H 
G.L. Sanghi and Vinoo Bhagat for the Appellants. 
O.P.AGARWALv. BATARABEHERA[PAITANAIK,J.] 
971 
_..,. 
P.N. Misra, R.S. Jena and Raj Kumar Mehta for the Respondents. 
A 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
PATTANAIK, J. This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 
4.7.85 of the Orissa High Court whereunder the High Court has come to B 
the conclusion that the agricultural lands even within the municipal· area 
will come under the purview of the Orissa Land Reforms Act. The disputed 
land measuring 2.133 acres is situated on periphery of Cuttack Town and 
the said land was sold by a Registered Sale Deed dated 24.6.1966, in favour 
of non-scheduled caste persons by persons alleged to be belongi

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