RAJIV SARIN & ANR. versus STATE OF UTTARAKHAND & ORS.

Citation: [2011] 9 S.C.R. 1012 · Decided: 09-08-2011 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: S.H. KAPADIA

Cited by 6 judgment(s) · cites 1 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
B 
[20'11] 9 S.C.R. 1012 
RA.llV SARIN & ANR. 
v. 
STATE OF UTIARAKHAND & ORS. 
(Civil Appeal No. 4772 of 1998) 
AUGUST 9, 2011. 
[S.H. KAPADIA, C.11, DR. MUKUNDAKAM SHARMA, 
K. S. RADHAKRISHNAN, SWATANTER KUMAR AND 
ANIL R. DAVE, JJ.] 
C 
KUMAUN 
AND 
UTTARAKHAND 
ZAMINDARI 
ABOLITION AND LAND REFORMS ACT, 1960: 
Sections 4, 4-A(as amended by U.P. Act 15 of 1978), 8, 
18(1) and 19(1)(b) - Forest land- Vesting of, in the State -
' 
of 
Held: By virtue of s. 4-A of the Act, the rights, title and interest 
~ 
D of every hissedar in respect of forest land situated in the 
specified areas ceased with effect from 1.1.1978 and the 
same were vested in the State Government - Rule 41 of 
KUZALR Rules provides that forests belonging to State shall 
be managed by "Gaon Sabha or any other local authority, 
E established" upon a notification issued by the State - So, 
where the land acquired by the State is to be transferred to a 
Gaon SabhaNillage Panchayat for its management and use 
of land leading to betterment of village economy, the 
' 
legislation is in the nature of agrarian reforms - It is settled 
• 
F /aw that agrarian reforms fall within Entry 18 of List-II read with 
Entry 42 of List Ill of the Seventh Schedule to the Constitution 
- Validity of KUZALF~ Act and, particularly, ss. 4-A, 18(1) and 
19(1)(b)thereof is upheld- Constitution of India, 1950-Article 
254, Seventh Schedule, List II, Entry 18 read with Entry 42 of 
G List Ill - Kumaun and Uttarakhand Zamindari Abolition and 
Land Reform Rules, 1965 - r.41. 
CONSTITUTION OF IND/A, 1950: 
Article 254 (2), Seventh Schedule, List II Entry 18 read 
H 
1012 
... 
RAJIV SARIN & ANR. v. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND 1013 
..--., 
' 
_. 
with List Ill Entry 42 - KUZALR Act providing for vesting of A 
forest land in State Government - Held: KUZALR Act is an 
enactment for agrarian reforms and principally relatable to 
Entry 18 (land) of List II read with Entry 42 in List Ill and only 
-( 
incidentally trenches upon "forest" i.e. Entry 17-A of list Ill -
' 
Indian Forest Act, 1927 is relatable to Entry 17-A read with 
B 
Entry 42, both of List Ill and is in pith and substance relatable 
to Entry 17-A, as it deals with 'forests' and not with land and 
only incidentally spills over in the field of Entry 42 as it deals 
with "control over forest land and not property of the 
Government"-lndian Forest Act, 1927 does not deal with c 
agrarian reforms, but deals with forest policy and 
management and, therefore, is in a different field -
Consequently, in the instant matter, no case of repugnancy 
f 
is made out and Article 254 (2) has no application -
Accordingly, both the Acts are legally valid and constitutional D 
- Kumaun and Uttarakhand Zamindari Abolition and Land 
Reforms Act, 1960- Rule of repugnancy- Doctrine of pith and 
substance - Doctrine of occupied field. 
Article 300-A, Seventh Schedule, List II, Entry 18 and 
List Ill, Entry 42 --Acquisition and requisitioning of property -
E 
Compensation - Private forests -
Vesting of forest land in 
State by virtue of s. 4-A of KUZALR Act - Held: When State 
'> 
exercises the power of acquisition of a private property, 
., 
provision is ge~erally made in the statute to pay· 
compensation to be determined according to the criteria laid 
F 
down in the statute itself - In the instant case, acquisition of 
property by State in furtherance of the Directive Principles of 
State Policy was to distribute the material resources of the 
community - It does not require payment of market value or 
indemnification to the owner of the property expropriated -
G 
~ 
The acquisition and payment of amount are part of the same 
scheme and they cannot be separated -
Though adequacy 
of compensation cannot be questioned in a court of law, but 
at the same time the compensation cannot be illusory. 
H' 
1014 SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
(2011] 9 S.C.R. 
.~ 
A 
Article 300-A read with Article 226 - Private forests -
,_ 
, 
Vesting of fomst land in StatE1 - Compensation - Revenue 
authorities denying compensation stating that the KUZALR 
Act did not provide for a method to compute compensation 
in cases whern no income was derived from the forests - Held: 
g Awarding no compensation attracts the vice of illegal 
deprivation of property even in the light of the provisions of 
the Act and, therefore, amenable to writ jurisdiction - The 
intention of the legislature to pay compensation is abundantly 
clear from the fact that s. 19 itself prescribes that 
c compe

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