Case Note & Summary
The petitioners challenged an order of the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal (MRT) that had allowed a review petition and remanded the matter to the Collector for re-enquiry. The dispute concerned lands purchased by the petitioners' father in 1968 from the respondent's father. In 2000, the respondent initiated proceedings under the Maharashtra Restoration of Lands to Scheduled Tribes Act, 1974 and Section 36(2) of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966, alleging that the sale was invalid because the transferor was a tribal and the transferee was a non-tribal, and no prior permission of the Collector was obtained. The Tahsildar acted on this and dispossessed the petitioners. The petitioners appealed to the MRT, which allowed the appeal in 2013, holding the transaction valid as both parties were of the 'Andh' tribe and the challenge was barred by limitation. The respondent then filed a review petition, which the MRT allowed in 2019, remanding the matter. The petitioners approached the High Court. The High Court examined the legal position: the 'Andh' tribe was included in the Scheduled Tribes list only by the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Orders (Amendment) Act, 1976, which came into force on 20.11.1976, and the Maharashtra Restoration of Lands to Scheduled Tribes Act, 1975 was promulgated on 28.05.1975. Since the sale deed was executed on 30.01.1968, before these enactments, the transferor was not a Scheduled Tribe at the time of transfer, and the protective provisions did not apply. The High Court relied on precedents including Gopal v. Poshatti and Tukaram Laxman Gandewar v. Piraji Dharmaji Sidarwar, which held that the status of being a Scheduled Tribe must exist at the time of transfer. Consequently, the proceeding initiated after 32 years was not maintainable. The High Court allowed the writ petition, quashing the MRT's remand order.
Headnote
A) Scheduled Tribes - Land Transfer - Status at Time of Transfer - Maharashtra Restoration of Lands to Scheduled Tribes Act, 1974; Section 36(2) Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966 - The protection under these provisions applies only if the transferor was a Scheduled Tribe at the time of transfer; subsequent recognition as Scheduled Tribe does not invalidate the sale. Held that the proceeding was not maintainable as the tribe 'Andh' was recognized only in 1976, after the 1968 sale deed (Paras 7-9).
B) Limitation - Delay and Laches - Challenge after 32 years - The respondent filed proceedings in 2000 challenging a 1968 sale deed; such belated challenge is barred by limitation and cannot be entertained. Held that the proceeding itself was not maintainable due to inordinate delay (Paras 5, 9).
Issue of Consideration
Whether a proceeding under the Maharashtra Restoration of Lands to Scheduled Tribes Act, 1974 and Section 36(2) of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966 is maintainable when the transferor's tribe was recognized as Scheduled Tribe after the date of sale deed and the proceeding was initiated after 32 years
Final Decision
Writ Petition allowed in terms of prayer Clause (B); Rule made absolute. The order of MRT dated 12.07.2019 is quashed.
Case Details
2024 LawText (BOM) (7) 121
WRIT PETITION NO.1403 OF 2020
Mr. V. D. Patnurkar, Advocate for Petitioner. Mr. M. P. Kale, Advocate for Respondent No.1.
Daulatrao S/o Kondiba Shelke (Died) through Lrs
Pandit s/o Bhikaji Dakhure
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ Petition challenging order of Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal allowing review petition and remanding matter for re-enquiry
Remedy Sought
Petitioners sought quashing of MRT order dated 12.07.2019 and restoration of earlier appeal order dated 22.10.2013
Filing Reason
Petitioners' father purchased land in 1968; respondent initiated proceedings in 2000 under tribal land restoration laws; MRT initially allowed appeal but later allowed review and remanded; petitioners challenged remand order
Previous Decisions
Tahsildar dispossessed petitioners and handed possession to respondent; MRT allowed appeal on 22.10.2013 holding transaction valid; MRT allowed review on 12.07.2019 and remanded matter to Collector
Issues
Whether the proceeding under the Maharashtra Restoration of Lands to Scheduled Tribes Act, 1974 and Section 36(2) of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966 is maintainable when the transferor's tribe was recognized as Scheduled Tribe after the date of sale deed
Whether the challenge after 32 years is barred by limitation
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioners argued that the sale deed was executed in 1968 before the tribe 'Andh' was recognized as Scheduled Tribe in 1976 and before the Act of 1975 came into force; thus the proceeding was not maintainable and barred by limitation
Respondent argued that the matter was remanded for fresh enquiry on tribal status and all issues could be raised before the Collector; no prejudice would be caused
Ratio Decidendi
The status of being a Scheduled Tribe must exist at the time of transfer for the protective provisions of the Maharashtra Restoration of Lands to Scheduled Tribes Act, 1974 and Section 36(2) of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966 to apply. Subsequent recognition of the tribe does not invalidate a prior sale. Additionally, a challenge after 32 years is barred by limitation.
Judgment Excerpts
If the tribe of a transferor is recognized to be Scheduled Tribe any time after the date of sale-deed, then he is not entitled to the benefit of the provisions of the Maharashtra Restoration of lands to the Scheduled Tribes Act, 1974.
The status of the parties, therefore, has to be considered at the time or prior to completion of the transfer. The change in status after the transfer, if any, has no relevance and restriction provided under section 36-A are not at all attracted.
Procedural History
Sale deed executed on 30.01.1968. On 07.07.2000, respondent filed proceeding under Act of 1974 and Section 36(2) MLR Code. Tahsildar dispossessed petitioners. Petitioners appealed to MRT, which allowed appeal on 22.10.2013. Respondent filed review petition with condonation of delay and obtained ex-parte stay. Petitioners filed writ petition challenging stay; High Court directed MRT to decide review within six weeks. MRT allowed review on 12.07.2019 and remanded matter to Collector. Petitioners filed present writ petition challenging remand order.
