Bombay High Court Allows Conversion of Land Despite Acquisition for Road, Holding That Fragmentation Under Land Revenue Code Does Not Apply When Land Is Acquired by State. The Court directed the Additional Collector to consider the conversion application afresh, rejecting the fragmentation objection based on the acquisition of a portion of the land for road construction.

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: GOA In Favour of Accused
  • 74
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The petitioners, owners of land bearing Survey No.67/11 in Navelim, Goa, applied for conversion of their land from agricultural to non-agricultural use. The Additional Collector-I refused to consider the application, citing that a 180 sq. metre portion of the land had been acquired by the State for road construction, and that partition of the property under the Land Revenue Code would result in fragmentation. The petitioners challenged this refusal by way of a writ petition. The Court observed that the acquisition by the State is for a public purpose and does not constitute fragmentation under the Code. The Court held that the respondent's refusal was erroneous and directed the Additional Collector to consider the conversion application afresh, without raising the fragmentation objection. The petition was allowed with no order as to costs.

Headnote

A) Land Law - Conversion of Land - Fragmentation - Sections 5, 6, 7 of the Goa Land Revenue Code, 1968 - The petitioners sought conversion of their land for non-agricultural use. The respondent refused on the ground that a portion of the land had been acquired by the State for road construction, leading to fragmentation under the Code. The Court held that when land is acquired by the State, the question of fragmentation does not arise as the acquisition is for a public purpose and the remaining land can be considered for conversion. The Court directed the respondent to consider the conversion application afresh without raising the fragmentation objection. (Paras 3-5)

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the refusal to consider conversion of land on the ground of fragmentation under the Land Revenue Code is valid when a portion of the land has been acquired by the State for road construction.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

Writ petition allowed. Impugned communications quashed and set aside. Respondent No.2 directed to consider the conversion application afresh without raising the objection of fragmentation.

Law Points

  • Land conversion
  • Fragmentation
  • Land Revenue Code
  • Acquisition
  • Writ jurisdiction
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2015 LawText (BOM) (10) 131

Writ Petition No. 532/2015

2015-10-21

F.M. Reis, K.L. Wadane

Shivan Desai, A. N. S. Nadkarni, D. Lawande

Ramanand P. Raicar, Gourish P. Raicar, Damodar Purshottam alias Ladu Raicar

State of Goa, Additional Collector-I, Under Secretary (Revenue)

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Writ petition challenging refusal to consider land conversion application.

Remedy Sought

Direction to respondent to consider conversion application without raising fragmentation objection.

Filing Reason

Respondent refused to consider conversion application citing fragmentation due to acquisition of part of land for road.

Previous Decisions

Communications dated 9th June, 2014 and 7th May, 2015 refusing to examine conversion applications.

Issues

Whether the refusal to consider conversion of land on ground of fragmentation is valid when a portion has been acquired by the State.

Submissions/Arguments

Petitioners argued that acquisition by State does not amount to fragmentation under Land Revenue Code. Respondents contended that partition would result in fragmentation.

Ratio Decidendi

When land is acquired by the State for a public purpose, the question of fragmentation under the Land Revenue Code does not arise, and the remaining land can be considered for conversion.

Judgment Excerpts

The acquisition by the State Government for construction of road is for a public purpose and, as such, the question of fragmentation does not arise. The respondent No.2 shall consider the application of the petitioners for conversion of the land afresh without raising the objection of fragmentation.

Procedural History

Petitioners filed conversion application; respondent refused by communications dated 9.6.2014 and 7.5.2015; petitioners filed writ petition; heard and allowed on 21.10.2015.

Acts & Sections

  • Goa Land Revenue Code, 1968: Sections 5, 6, 7
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Disposes of Appeal Against Interim Order in Entry Tax Interest Dispute. No Further Recovery of Interest on Arrears of Entry Tax Pending Final Decision of Writ Petition Under U.P. Act 2007.
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Dismisses Petition Challenging Renaming of Road as Maharaj Agrasen Road. Consent Terms in Earlier Writ Petition Did Not Confer Ownership Rights Over Road B to Petitioner Company.