Pradip S/O Madhusudam Nand vs The State Of Maharashtra, Thr. ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 5367 Bom

                       WP-7377-2019(J).odt                                                                               1/14



                                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                                  NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.

                                                   WRIT PETITION NO. 7377 of 2019

                               Pradip s/o Madhusudan Nand,
                               Aged about 60 years,
                               R/o. Kedia Plots, Akola,
                               Tahsil and District Akola.
                                                                                   ..... PETITIONER
                                        ...V E R S U S...

                       1.      The State of Maharashtra,
                               through its Secretary, Department of Revenue,
                               Mantralaya, Mumbai-32.
                       2.      The Divisional Commissioner (Revenue),
                               Amravati Division, Amravati.
                       3.      The Collector,
                               Amravati.
                       4.      The Sub-Divisional Officer,
                               Dharni, Tahsil and District Amravati.
Amendment carried
out as per Hon'ble     5.      Ms. Pavneet Kaur,
Court's order dated
19.01.2023                     Collector, Amravati.
Sd/-C.F.Petititoner.
                                                                                             ....... RESPONDENTS
                       ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                       Shri Anand Parchure, Advocate for petitioner.
                       Shri Amit Madiwale, Assistant Government Pleader for respondents.
                       ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                       CORAM :- A.S.CHANDURKAR AND M. W. CHANDWANI, JJ.
                       ARGUMENTS WERE HEARD ON     : 04.05.2023
                       JUDGMENT IS PRONOUNCED ON : 09.06.2023

                       JUDGMENT (Per A.S.CHANDURKAR, J.)

In view of notice for final disposal issued earlier, the learned

counsel for the parties have been heard by issuing Rule and making it

returnable forthwith.

WP-7377-2019(J).odt 2/14

2. The petitioner claims to have purchased land bearing Survey No.9

located at Mouza-Lavada, Tahsil Chikhaldara, District Amravati, admeasuring

3 Hectares and 26 R pursuant to registered sale deed dated 13.05.1996. It is

the case of the petitioner that his predecessor-in-title, Ramaji Yevale had

sought prior permission from the Competent Authority for selling the said

land which was accordingly granted on 31.03.1996. The petitioner

thereafter on 02.02.2000 moved an application before the Sub-Divisional

Officer, Dharni, seeking permission to change the status of the said land from

occupancy Class-II to Class-I. Such permission was accordingly granted by

the Competent Authority on 10.02.2000. Thus, according to the petitioner

by virtue of the order dated 10.02.2000, the aforesaid land stood converted

to occupancy Class-I. It is also the case of the petitioner that on 04.05.2000

the Sub-Divisional Officer, Dharni passed similar orders granting permission

for converting other lands from occupancy Class-II to Class-I. However, in

view of a subsequent order dated 14.08.2000 passed by the Sub-Divisional

Officer the permission to convert the said lands came to be revoked. Being

aggrieved, the land owners of the said lands initiated proceedings under the

Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966 (for short, the Code of 1966). The

orders passed by the Divisional Commissioner on 11.02.2014 and

20.02.2014 refusing to grant permission to convert the said lands came to be

challenged under Section 257 of the Code of 1966 before the Honourable

WP-7377-2019(J).odt 3/14

Minister of State (Revenue). By the order dated 12.09.2014 the Honourable

Minister of State allowed the appeal preferred by the land owners and set

aside the orders dated 11.02.2014 and 20.02.2014 passed by the Divisional

Commissioner. It was held therein that the initial order dated 04.05.2000

passed by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Dharni, was legally correct and hence

the order thereafter passed by the Additional Collector on 29.12.2003

affirming the earlier order was also legal and valid. It was directed that the

Collector, Amravati should undertake necessary action with regard to

conversion of lands into Class-I by following the prevailing Rules and

Regulations with respect to similarly situated lands. The aforesaid order was

sought to be reviewed at the instance of the Divisional Commissioner,

Amravati. However on 26.10.2016 the Honourable Minister of State

(Revenue) dismissed the said review petition that was filed under Section

258 of the Code of 1966 and observed that the original order dated

12.09.2014 did not call for any review. The petitioner seeks to rely upon the

aforesaid orders to support the prayer that conversion of the land to Class-I

could not have been now denied by the Authorities.

3. The petitioner on 27.03.2017 filed proceedings before the

Divisional Commissioner, Amravati, seeking implementation of the orders

dated 12.09.2014 and 26.10.2016 insofar as land bearing Survey No.9

situated at Mouza Lavada, Tahsil Chikhaldara, District Amravati was

WP-7377-2019(J).odt 4/14

concerned. On 17.06.2017 the Divisional Commissioner directed the

Collector as well as the Sub-Divisional officer, Dharni to implement the order

dated 26.10.2016 in its true letter and spirit by following the Rules that were

prevailing as on date. Despite aforesaid direction, it is the grievance of the

petitioner that the said orders have not been implemented. In the

meanwhile, the provisions of Section 29 A of the Code of 1966 came to be

inserted by virtue of Maharashtra Act No.XVII of 2016 that came into effect

on 29.04.2016. As per the said provision, conversion of occupancy rights

was permitted on payment of conversion premium and after following the

prescribed procedure as well as subject to terms and conditions as

prescribed. Based on the aforesaid provision, the Revenue and Forest

Department on 08.03.2019 issued a Notification and introduced the

Maharashtra Land Revenue (Conversion of Occupancy Class-II and Lease-

hold Lands into Occupancy Class-I Lands) Rules, 2019 (for short, the Rules of

2019). Conversion premium payable was prescribed in the said Rules. On

the basis of the Rules of 2019, an amount of premium of Rs.22,05,841/-

came to be demanded from the petitioner and it is the case of the petitioner

that the aforesaid amount has been deposited by him. Despite aforesaid

since necessary steps for conversion of the lands in question into occupancy

Class-I were not taken by the respondents, the present writ petition has been

filed seeking a direction that the orders of conversion as initially passed and

thereafter confirmed by the Honourable Minister of State (Revenue) dated

WP-7377-2019(J).odt 5/14

12.09.2014 be implemented. By amending the writ petition, the petitioner

has sought a direction that the Notification dated 08.03.2019 was not

applicable to the lands of the petitioner since the order of conversion was

passed prior to it coming into force.. As a consequence, the orders dated

13.12.2021, 26.05.2022 and 15.11.2022 have also been challenged. The

petitioner also seeks refund of the amount of conversion premium paid by

him alongwith interest.

4. Shri Anand Parchure, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted

that permission for conversion of land bearing Survey No.9 admeasuring

about 3 Hectares 26 R at Mouza-Lavada, Tahsil Chikhaldara, District

Amravati had already been granted on 10.02.2000. In view of this order the

Revenue Authorities ought to have taken necessary steps of treating the said

land as occupancy Class-I. However, relying upon certain orders passed in

respect of other lands in Chikhaldara Tahsil, the petitioner was not being

given benefit of the permission that was already granted to convert the said

land into occupancy Class-I. He submitted that even in the litigation

pertaining to such other lands, the Honourable Minister of State for Revenue

on 12.09.2014 and thereafter on 26.10.2016 had held that the initial order

of conversion passed with regard to the other lands on 04.05.2000 was

correct. In the light of that adjudication, necessary consequential steps

ought to have taken by the Revenue Authorities. However by relying upon a

WP-7377-2019(J).odt 6/14

subsequent Notification dated 08.03.2019 the Revenue Authorities sought

recovery of conversion premium and denied the benefit of the earlier orders

to the petitioner. Since the permission for conversion to occupancy

Class-I was granted on 10.02.2000, the petitioner's rights would be governed

by that order and not by the subsequent events as well as subsequent

enactments in that regard. The respondents erred in relying upon the Rules

of 2019 while imposing conditions on the petitioner in the matter of

conversion of the said lands. These Rules did not have any retrospective

operation so as to bind the petitioner. It was therefore submitted that the

Revenue Authorities ought to be directed to implement the orders passed by

the Honourable Minister of State for Revenue on 12.09.2014 as well as on

26.10.2016. The subsequent orders dated 13.12.2021, 26.05.2022 and

15.11.2022 holding otherwise were thus liable to be set aside. It was thus

prayed that the writ petition be allowed and the impugned orders be set

aside.

5. Shri Amit Madiwale, learned Assistant Government Pleader for the

respondents opposed the writ petition. Relying upon the written notes

placed on record, it was submitted that though permission had been granted

initially to convert the lands into occupancy Class-I, various complaints were

received by the Revenue Authorities in respect of alleged irregularities in the

conversion of said lands. Based on those complaints the matter was

WP-7377-2019(J).odt 7/14

re-examined in the context of lands in Tahsil Chikhaldara. Though orders

had been passed on 12.09.2014 and 26.10.2016 by the Honourable Minister

of State for Revenue, in the meanwhile the provisions of Section 29 A of the

Code of 1966 came to be inserted. Opinion of the State Government was

accordingly sought and based on such response as well as the Rules of 2019,

necessary steps were taken by the Revenue Authorities in the matter of

conversion of the land in question as occupancy Class-I. The petitioner had

deposited the requisite amount in terms of the orders as passed being

Rs.22,05,841/- as per valuation. It was further submitted that insofar as the

grievances raised by the petitioner with regard to lands at Mouza-Motha,

Tahsil Chikhaldara, District Amravati was concerned, the petitioner could

avail appropriate statutory remedy as available under the Code of 1966. It

was thus submitted that the petitioner was required to act in accordance

with the Rules of 2019 while seeking conversion of his lands from occupancy

Class-II to occupancy Class-I. Hence no relief could be granted to the

petitioner.

6. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties at length and

with their assistance, we have perused the documents on record. It is not in

dispute that insofar as the land bearing Survey No.9 of Mouza-Lavada, Tahsil

Chikhaldara, District Amravati is concerned, the petitioner had purchased

the same to the extent of 3 Hectares 26 R on 13.05.1996 pursuant to the

WP-7377-2019(J).odt 8/14

permission granted by the Divisional Commissioner to the original owner to

sell the said land. On 10.02.2000 permission was granted to convert the said

land from occupancy Class-II to occupancy Class-I. This was pursuant to the

petitioner's application dated 02.02.2000. It is thus clear from the record

that the order dated 10.02.2000 passed by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Dharni,

permitting conversion of the said land under Section 29(2)(c)of the Code of

1966 has attained finality. The record indicates that in view of complaints

received by the Revenue Authorities the issue with regard to the conversion

of land in Tahsil Chikhaldara was re-opened by the said Authorities which

resulted in the aggrieved parties challenging the said action under the Code

of 1966. In these proceedings while exercising jurisdiction under Section 257

of the Code of 1966 the State Government on 12.09.2014 held that the order

dated 04.05.2000 permitting conversion of such lands to Class-I was correct.

A further direction was issued that with regard to similarly situated lands

necessary steps be taken for having them converted into occupancy Class-I in

the light of the observations made in the order. In further exercise of power

of review under Section 258 of the Code of 1966, the order dated

12.09.2014 came to be confirmed on 26.10.2016 by the State Government.

Even that adjudication has now attained finality.

From the aforesaid, it becomes clear that firstly the petitioner was

granted permission to convert the land from Survey No.9 of Mouza-Lavada

into occupancy Class-I on 10.02.2000. Further the State Government also

WP-7377-2019(J).odt 9/14

directed the Revenue Authorities while upholding a similar order of

conversion to see that other similarly situated lands were also accordingly

converted.

7. It is also to be noted that after the aforesaid adjudication under

Sections 257 and 258 of the Code of 1966, the petitioner sought

implementation of the order of conversion by approaching the Divisional

Commissioner. On 17.06.2017 the Divisional Commissioner, Amravati

directed the Collector as well as the Sub-Divisional Officer, Dharni to

implement the order dated 26.10.2016 passed by the State Government in its

true letter and spirit by following the law as well as the Rules applicable as

on date. This would indicate that the Revenue Authorities were duty bound

to implement the earlier orders passed by the State Government upholding

conversion of the lands as occupancy Class-I. It however appears that in the

meanwhile the provisions of Section 29 A came to be inserted in the Code of

1966 with effect from 29.04.2016. Thereafter on 08.03.2019 the Rules of

2019 were brought into force. Acting on the aforesaid statutory enactments,

the matter with regard to conversion of the petitioner's land at Mouza-

Lavada to occupancy Class-I came to be examined. This has resulted in

passing of the order dated 26.05.2022 by the Collector wherein the

petitioner's land came to be valued in terms of Section 29 A of the Code of

1966 as amended. The market value was thus determined and by applying

WP-7377-2019(J).odt 10/14

the Rules of 2019 an amount of Rs.22,05,841/- came to be demanded from

the petitioner. Though the petitioner moved representations in that regard,

he was required to deposit the aforesaid amount which he did on

16.03.2022. It is thus clear that insofar as the land bearing Survey No.9 at

Mouza-Lavada is concerned, the steps for its conversion into Class-I have

been taken by relying upon the Rules of 2019.

8. A perusal of Section 29 A of the Code of 1966 indicates that it

prescribes the manner in which conversion of occupancy of land belonging to

various categories can be undertaken. The same requires payment of

conversion premium in that regard. On a plain reading of the aforesaid

provision, it can be seen that the same is not intended to have any

retrospective operation. In other words, with regard to lands which have

already been permitted to be converted from occupancy Class-II to

occupancy Class-I, conversion premium has not been prescribed. The said

provision is intended to apply prospectively while converting such lands. On

the basis of said provision that has been incorporated on 29.04.2016,

conversion premium is being demanded from the petitioner though the order

of conversion was already passed on 10.02.2000. This position is further

clear on reading the Rules of 2019 which prescribe the manner in which such

conversion of occupancy Class of the land can be sought. It is thus clear that

insofar as land bearing Survey No.9 of Mouza-Lavada is concerned, it was

WP-7377-2019(J).odt 11/14

already permitted to be converted to occupancy Class-I on 10.02.2000. The

statutory provision that has been enacted after about fifteen years from such

orders of permission cannot be applied retrospectively in absence of any

statutory provision in that regard. It is thus clear that the rights of the

petitioner would be governed by the position as prevailing when the

permission for conversion was granted. In any event, the order passed by

the Divisional Commissioner on 17.06.2017 in the proceedings preferred by

the petitioner seeking implementation of the orders passed by the State

Government, it was held in clear terms that the orders of conversion ought to

be implemented by following the Rules as applicable on the relevant date.

Thus in the present facts the Rules of 2019 could not have been relied upon

while taking consequential steps for implementing the order of conversion

dated 10.02.2000. It is reiterated that the present is a case where the

petitioner is seeking implementation of the order of conversion dated

10.02.2000 insofar as the land bearing Survey No.9 of Mouza-Lavada, Tahsil

Chikhaldara District Amravati is concerned and is not seeking any permission

for its conversion. Consequentially, the order directing the petitioner to

deposit an amount of Rs.22,05,841/- towards conversion premium is

unsustainable since the Rules of 2019 are being sought to be applied

retrospectively to the order of conversion dated 10.02.2000.

As a consequence the earlier order dated 13.12.2021 passed by the

Additional Collector directing the petitioner to deposit sum of Rs.22,05,841/-

WP-7377-2019(J).odt 12/14

with regard to land bearing Survey No.9 located at Mouza-Lavada, Tahsil

Chikhaldara, District Amravati is also liable to be set aside.

9. Insofar as challenge raised to the order dated 15.11.2022 is

concerned, it is seen that the said order has been passed with regard to lands

of the petitioner located at Mouza-Motha, Tahsil Chikhaldara, District

Amravati. It holds that since the said land came to be transferred without

permission of the Competent Authority, the petitioner's application for

conversion of that land to occupancy Class-I was rejected. In this regard, we

find that since the order dated 15.11.2022 pertains to a different land

located at Mouza-Motha, the petitioner needs to be directed to avail the

statutory remedy available under the Code of 1966 if he is aggrieved by the

rejection of his application seeking conversion of the said land to occupancy

Class-I. The said proceedings being independent of the proceedings

pertaining to land located at Mouza-Lavada, we are not inclined to permit

the petitioner to by-pass the statutory remedy available in that regard.

10. In the light of the aforesaid discussion, the following order is

passed:

(i) The orders dated 13.12.2021 and 26.05.2022 insofar as they

pertain to land bearing Survey No.9 Mouza-Lavada, Tahsil

Chikhaldara, District Amravati are set aside since the said orders

seek to retrospectively apply the Rules of 2019 while implementing

WP-7377-2019(J).odt 13/14

the order dated 10.02.2000 passed by the Sub-Divisional Officer,

Dharni permitting conversion of said land from occupancy Class-II

to occupancy Class-I. Consequentially the amount of

Rs.22,05,841/- shall be refunded to the petitioner within a period

of two months from today failing which the said amount shall

liable to be refunded with interest @4% per annum from the date

of the judgment till its realisation.

(ii) The respondent no.2 shall ensure that its order dated 17.06.2017

passed in Appeal Case No.41/ LND-38/ Aladhoba/ Chikhaldara/

Amravti 2016-2017 is duly implemented by considering the

statutory provisions as applicable when the order of permission

was passed.

(iii) The respondent nos. 3 and 4 shall take all necessary steps to

implement the order dated 10.02.2000 passed by the Sub-

Divisional Officer, Dharni, which permits conversion of land

bearing Survey No.9 Tahsil Chikhaldara, District Amravati from

occupancy Class-II to occupancy Class-I.

(iv) The petitioner is at liberty to challenge the order dated 15.11.2022

passed by the Collector, Amravati in respect of the land bearing

Survey No.22, Mouza-Motha, Tahsil Chikhaldara, District Amrvati

by availing the statutory remedy prescribed under the Code of

1966. If such remedy is availed of by the petitioner within 60 days

WP-7377-2019(J).odt 14/14

from today, such proceedings shall be entertained on merits

without going into the aspect of delay and shall be decided on its

own merits and in accordance with law.

(v) Rule is made partly absolute in aforesaid terms leaving the parties

to bear their own costs.

         (M. W. CHANDWANI, J.)                   (A.S.CHANDURKAR, J.)




Andurkar..