ON THE DEATH OF TULSIRAM SHARMA ADHIKARI HIS LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES SMT. PURNAMAYA DEVI & ORS. Vs. SMT. HIRONIBALA DEVI & ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) (Oral) - B.L. Hansaria. J,- An important question relating to rights of the inhabitants of this state to get Periodic Patta under the provisions of the Assam Land and Revenue Regulation 1886, for short the "Regulation", has come up for decision in this application under Art. 226 of the Constitution. The precise question for our determination is whether after coming into force of the Manipur Land Revenue and Land Reforms Act, 1960, in short the "Land Reforms Act", the provisions contained in the Regulation relating to conversion of Annual Patta land into Periodic Patta land survived or not.

(2.) The question has arisen for our determination on these broad facts. An area of land measuring 5. 29 acres covered by Dag Nos. 1115, 1226 and 1310 of Patta No. 94 of Serous Village was in occupation of Gajendra Chandra. At one point of time he had been granted Annual Patta for the laud in question. It is the case of the predecessor-in interest of the petitioners that Gajendra Chandra had transferred the land to him sometime in 1967. Thereafter on being satisfied that the land was under the possession of the petitioners, the Assistant Survey and Settlement Officer granted mutation in the name of the petitioner and thereafter on payment of the premium, the Annual Patta was converted into Periodic Patta. A dispute having been raised by the legal heirs of Gajendra Chandra, the matter came to be examined by the Additional Deputy Commissioner who held that the Assistant Survey and Settlement Officer had no jurisdiction to pass such an order. The Revenue Tribunal endorsed the view of the Additional Deputy Commissioner. It is this order of the Tribunal which has been assailed in this petition.

(3.) Shri T. Bhubon Singh submits that in view of what have been stated in section 170(1) of the Land Reforms Act so much of the provisions contained in the Regulation will have to be followed in the State which is not contrary to any part of the provisions contained in the Land Reforms Act. The learned counsel submits that the Land Reforms Act has not dealt with the question of conversion of Annual Patta land into Periodic Patta land and so there is no provision in the Land Reforms Act which is either expressly or impliedly against the provisions contained in the Regulation relating to the conversion of Annual Patta into Periodic Patta. To appreciate the submission of Shri T. Bhubon Singh, we may note section 170(1) of the Land Reforms Act. This section reads as follows: