Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Smt. Jahedabi wd/o Abdul Wahab, filed a writ petition challenging the forfeiture of Field Survey No. 17/2, area 1 Hectare 68 R, situated at Digras, District Yavatmal. The land was originally allotted to Respondent No. 4, Ramchandra Damdaji Ladke, under Section 27 of the Maharashtra Agricultural Lands (Ceiling on Holdings) Act, 1961 (Ceiling Act). The petitioner claimed that her husband had exchanged his land (Survey No. 17/1) with Respondent No. 4 through a registered exchange deed dated 03.01.1991, and thus she became the owner of Survey No. 17/2. The petitioner argued that the land was not recorded as ceiling land or class II land in revenue records, and therefore the exchange was valid. The respondents, including the Divisional Commissioner, Additional Collector, and Sub-Divisional Officer, contended that the transfer was illegal under Section 29 of the Ceiling Act, which prohibits transfer of land granted under Section 27 without previous sanction of the Collector. The court examined the provisions of Section 27 and Section 29 of the Ceiling Act. Section 27 deals with the grant of land to persons entitled to possession, and Section 29 imposes a restriction on transfer of such land, requiring previous sanction of the Collector. The court noted that the exchange deed was executed without obtaining such sanction, making the transfer void. The court rejected the petitioner's argument that the land was not recorded as ceiling land, holding that the statutory prohibition applies irrespective of revenue entries. The court also noted that the petitioner's husband had given his clear land to Respondent No. 4, who later disposed of it, but that did not cure the illegality. The court held that the forfeiture of the land was justified and dismissed the writ petition. The judgment was delivered by Justice B.P. Dharmadhikari on January 4, 2010.
Headnote
A) Land Ceiling - Transfer of Ceiling Surplus Land - Section 29 of Maharashtra Agricultural Lands (Ceiling on Holdings) Act, 1961 - Prohibition on Transfer - The petitioner acquired land through an exchange deed from a person who had obtained the land under Section 27 of the Ceiling Act. The court held that such transfer without previous sanction of the Collector is void under Section 29, and the exchange deed cannot confer valid title. The forfeiture of the land was upheld. (Paras 2-4) B) Land Ceiling - Exchange Deed - Validity - Section 29 of Maharashtra Agricultural Lands (Ceiling on Holdings) Act, 1961 - Sanction of Collector - The court held that the exchange deed dated 03.01.1991 was illegal as it violated Section 29, which prohibits transfer of land granted under Section 27 without previous sanction of the Collector. The petitioner's argument that the land was not recorded as ceiling land was rejected because the statutory prohibition applies regardless of revenue records. (Paras 2-4) C) Land Ceiling - Forfeiture of Land - Section 29 of Maharashtra Agricultural Lands (Ceiling on Holdings) Act, 1961 - Consequence of Illegal Transfer - The court held that the forfeiture of the land transferred in violation of Section 29 is justified. The petitioner cannot claim any right over the land based on an illegal exchange. (Paras 4-5)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the transfer of land by way of exchange by a person who had obtained the land under Section 27 of the Maharashtra Agricultural Lands (Ceiling on Holdings) Act, 1961, without previous sanction of the Collector, is valid and whether the forfeiture of such land is justified.
Final Decision
The writ petition is dismissed. The forfeiture of Field Survey No. 17/2 is upheld. No order as to costs.
Law Points
- Transfer of land allotted under Section 27 of Ceiling Act without previous sanction of Collector is void
- Exchange deed cannot override statutory prohibition
- Revenue records cannot confer title if transfer is illegal
