SHEIKH MOHAMED FATEMOHAMED Vs. RAISUDDIN AZIMUDDIN KATIL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WITH reference to the provisions of Hyderabad Abolition of Inams and Cash Grants Act, 1954, section 2-A, (hereinafter referred to as the "said Act") an interesting question arose before the Division Bench of this Court on 31-1-1989. The said Act, as the name suggests, is enacted in keeping pace with the post independence exercise of the land reforms. As a part of that drive, various State Governments in the country were undertaking the exercise of abolition of different tenures and make a simple ground reality by enabling the actual tiller to become an occupant, free from interference of so called landlords, half of whom were absentee, making the occupant tiller to till throughout his life for the benefit of that landlord. With this sort of expectation and to stop exploitation going over for centuries, the Statutes had to be enacted and one of such Statues is the said Act.

(2.) THE balance had to be struck in the course of land reforms, that both the tiller and his erstwhile landlord should get a fair deal and therefore, procedural aspect had to be taken care of. As a part of that, in the said Act, section 2-A was enacted, which is reproduced for easy reference herein under:-

(3.) READING of sub-section (1) makes it clear that there are two possibilities related to a question to be decided under section 2-A of the said Act. Six questions posed under sub-section (1) may be decided by the State Government or in a given case, by the officer authorised by the Government to decide the question.