PARAKRAMSINHJI NATVARSINHJI PUVAR Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition preferred under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India to challenge the judgment and order dated 7th July, 1999 passed by the Gujarat Revenue Tribunal in Revision Application No.TEN.B.A. 427/93 arises from the proceedings under Section 8 of the Gujarat Agricultural Lands Ceiling Act, 1960 (hereinafter referred to as, "the Act").

(2.) The Act has been enacted to fix a ceiling on holding agricultural land and to provide for the acquisition and disposal of the surplus agricultural land with a view to securing the distribution of agricultural land as best to subserve the common good. Section 5 of the Act determines the ceiling area in different local areas as specified in Schedule I of the Act. Chapter III of the Act comprising Sections 6 to 26 provides for fixation of ceiling on holding land, determination of surplus land and acquisition thereof. The ceiling areas specified in Schedule I of the Act came to be modified with effect from 1st April, 1976 by the Gujarat Agricultural Lands Ceiling (Amendment) Act, 1972 (Gujarat Act No.2 of 1974) (hereinafter referred to as, "the Act of 1972"). Sub-section (1) of Section 8 of the Act provides, inter alia, that where after 24th day of January, 1971, but before the specified date (i.e. 1st April, 1976), any person has transferred whether by sale, gift, mortgage, with possession, exchange lease, surrender or otherwise or partitioned any land held by him, such transfer or partition shall, unless it is proved to the contrary, be deemed to have been made in anticipation in order to defeat the object of the Act. Sub-section (2) thereof provides for an application to be made to the Collector for declaration that a transfer or partition was not made in anticipation in order to defeat the object of the Act. Sub-section (3) thereof enjoins the Collector to hold an inquiry and after giving an opportunity to the transferor and the transferee to be heard to decide whether or not such transfer or partition of land was made in anticipation in order to defeat the object of the Act.

(3.) The petitioner owned certain lands admeasuring 72 Acres at village Kathwada, District Sabarkantha. Out of the said lands, by an agreement dated 1st July, 1970, he agreed to sell land Survey No.263 admeasuring 32 Acres to one Shri Jivatsinhji, the father of the respondent no.3. In pursuance of part payment of sale price, the petitioner handed over the possession of the land to the said Shri Jivatsinhji. On receipt of the entire consideration, by a registered sale deed executed on 5th May, 1972, the petitioner sold the said land to the said Shri Jivatsinhji. On introduction of the Act of 1972 with effect from 1st April, 1976, the petitioner made application to the Deputy Collector under Section 8(2) of the Act to declare that the sale in question was bonafide and was not made in order to defeat the provisions of the Act. After a round of litigation the said application came to be rejected by the Deputy Collector, Sabarkantha by his order dated 25th September, 1981. It was the case of the petitioner that at the relevant time he was a minor; he sold the land through a guardian to generate money to meet the expenses for a Tractor, bullocks and other agricultural equipments. He also produced a bill/cash memo for the purchase of Tractor. The Deputy Collector was, however, of the opinion that as the sale was made between two terminal dates i.e. 24th January, 1971 and 1st April, 1976, the same was not bonafide and was made with a view to defeating the provisions of the Act. He accordingly rejected the application made by the petitioner. Feeling aggrieved, the petitioner preferred Revision Application No.427/1993 before the Gujarat Revenue Tribunal. The order of the Deputy Collector came to be confirmed by the Tribunal by the impugned judgment and order dated 7th July, 1999. Therefore, the present petition.