STATE OF ORISSA versus NITYANAND SATPATHY AND ORS.

Citation: [2003] SUPP. 2 S.C.R. 66 · Decided: 31-07-2003 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: V.N. KHARE, K.G. BALAKRISHNAN, S.B. SINHA · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
ST A TE OF ORI SSA 
v. 
NITYANAND SATPATHY AND ORS. 
JULY 31, 2003 
B 
[V.N. KHARE, CJ., K.G. BALAKRISHNAN AND S.B. SINHA, JJ.] 
Orissa Estates Abolition Act, 1953: 
C 
S. 7-Non-agricultural and 'anabadi' land-Application for settlement 
of-Intermediary in possession of 'anabadi' land-After his deaih his sons 
executed leases thereof-Dy. Collector revoked the leases-Application by 
sons for settlement of land in their favour-Allowed by Collector Land sold-
Board of Revenue u/s. 38 by suo motu power revoked t/iie settlement-Writ 
petition challenging order of Board of Revenue allowed by High Court-Held 
D the settlement made in favour of ex-intermediary his sons was bad in law-
The land being 'anabadi' land must be deemed to have vested in the State 
Government-In terms of sub-section (1) ofS. 7 only the land used for cultivation 
and horticulture purposes and which were in 'khas possession' of an 
intermediary on the date of vesting would be conceived-For the purpose of 
E taking benefit of S. 7(J)(a) the intermediary must be in cultivating possession 
of the land either by himself, with his own stock or by his own servants or by 
hired labour or with hired stock-The nature and character of the land being 
non-agricultural~ the same evidently was not in cultivating possession of the 
intermediary and, thus, an application for settlement of the said land purported 
to be in terms of S. 7 was not maintainable-Furthermore, the land being not 
F 
used.either for cultivation or for horticulture purposes on the date of vesting 
did not attract the provisions of clause (a) of sub-section (1) of S. 7-Judgment 
of High Court set aside. 
S. 2(J)-'khas possession '-Meaning of 
G 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 7670of1997. 
From the Judgment and Order dated 22.7.1996 of the Orissa High 
Court in O.J.C. No. 215 of 1992. 
J.K. Das, Janaranjan Das, G. Biswal, Ms. M. Gahlot, S. Mishra, Anukul 
H 
66 
(-
> 
ST ATE v. NITY ANAND SA TPA THY 
67 
Ch. Pradhan, Shiv Sagar Tiwari, Ms. K. Sarada Devi, Bhupender Yadav, Ms. A 
Babita Yadav and Ms. Asha Gopalan Nair for the Appearing parties. 
The following Order of the Court was delivered : 
A large tract of land situate in Village Badagaon, Puri was part of the 
estate of one Manindra Chandra Sinha. 
~ 
On 24.8.1953, the Orissa State Legislature enacted an Act known as the 
Orissa Estates Abolition Act (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"). The said 
Act came into force with effect from 24th August, 1953. Section 5 of the Act 
provided that all non-agricultural land shall vest in the State. Since the land 
undisputedly was non-agricultural land, the same vested in the State. It appears C 
that after the death of Manindra Chandra Sinha, his sons executed certain 
leases. The Dy. Collector, Puri by an order dated I 0.8.1957 revoked those 
leases. It may be mentioned that Manindra Chandra Sinha died in the year 
I 922 and by virtue of a will, his sons, namely, Bimal Chandra Sinha, Amresh 
Chandra Sinha and Brundaban Chandra Sinha succeeded to the aforesaid ID 
estate upon obtaining a probate. All the sons of Manindra Chandra Sinha 
applied in I 959 for settlement of the said land in their favour under Section 
7 of the Act. Although two of the sons have already died during pendency 
of the application, the Collector by order dated 17.6.1964 settled the aforesaid 
land in favour of the sons of Manindra Chandra Sinha. 
E 
Thereafter certain proceedings under the Ceilings Act were initiated 
against the sons of Manindri,t Chandra Sinha but we are not concerned dth 
those proceedings in the present case. Subsequently, the sons of Manindra 
Chandra Sinha by separate registered sale deeds dated 13.6.1983 sold the 
aforesaid land in favour of respondents herein. On 1.1.1992, the Board of F 
Revenue under Section 38B of the Act exercising suo motu power revoked 
the settlement of the aforesaid land granted in favour of the sons of Man indra 
Chandra Sinha, Inter a/ia, on the ground that the land being Anabadi land, 
had already vested in the State and thus the said land could not have been 
settled in favour of the sons of intermediary. The respondent-transferees 
thereafter filed a petition under Section 226 of the Constitution before the G 
High Court. The High Court by the impugned order allowed the writ petition 
and set aside the order passed by the Board of Revenue. Aggrieved the State 
of Orissa has filed this appeal by means of special leave petition. 
Learned counsel appear

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