Allahabad High Court
Meghai And Another vs State Of U.P. And Others on 8 January, 2020
Equivalent citations: AIRONLINE 2020 ALL 76, (2020) 3 ADJ 22 (ALL)
Author: Y.K.Srivastava
Bench: Yogendra Kumar Srivastava
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD AFR Court No. - 58 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 32914 of 2008 Petitioner :- Meghai And Another Respondent :- State of U.P. and Others Counsel for Petitioner :- B.N. Pathak Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Anuj Kumar,Awadhesh Mishra Hon'ble Dr. Yogendra Kumar Srivastava,J.
1. Heard Sri Pawan Giri, holding brief of Sri B.N.Pathak, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Amit Manohar, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel appearing for the State respondents.
2. Challenge in the present petition is to an order dated 02.06.2008 passed by the Additional Commissioner(Administration),Vindhyachal Mandal, Mirzapur in Case No. 12/333 of 2007 (Ghurau Vs. Meghai) in proceedings under Section 27 (4) of the U.P. Imposition of Ceiling On Land Holdings Act, 19601, whereby the lease granted in favour of the petitioners has been cancelled and the land in question has been directed to be reverted to the State Government.
3. Contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that the lease had been granted to the petitioners after completion of the requisite procedural formalities and that the order impugned has been passed without giving proper opportunity to the petitioners and as such the same is legally unsustainable.
4. Per contra, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel appearing for the State respondents has supported the order passed by the Additional Commissioner by stating that the petitioners did not belong to the category of persons eligible for allotment of the ceiling surplus land and accordingly the proceedings for cancellation of allotment were rightly initiated. Placing reliance upon the order-sheet of the case, a copy whereof has been annexed as annexure CA-1 to the counter affidavit filed by the State respondents, it is submitted that the order has been passed after due notice and opportunity to the petitioners and as such the same cannot be said to be arbitrary and illegal. It has also been pointed out that the land in question being not vacant at the relevant point of time the same could not have been allotted to the petitioners.
5. In order to appreciate the rival contentions the relevant statutory provisions may be adverted to.
6. The disposal and settlement of land declared surplus in proceedings under the Ceiling Act is provided for under Chapter IV thereof. For ease of reference, Section 27 of the Ceiling Act which pertains to the settlement of surplus land is being extracted below:-
"Section 27 - Settlement of surplus land - (1) The State Government shall settle out of the surplus land in a village in which no land is available for community purposes or in which the land as available is less than 15 acres with the Gram Sabha of that village so, however, that the total land in the village available for community purposes after such settlement does not exceed 15 acres. The land so settled with the Gram Sabha shall be used for planting trees, growing fodder or for such other community purposes, as may be prescribed.
(2) The State Government may either settle any surplus land in accordance with sub-section (1) or sub-section (3) or use or permit its use in accordance with Section 25 or manage or otherwise deal with it in such manner as it thinks fit.
(3) Any remaining surplus land shall be settled by the Collector in accordance with the order of preference and subject to the limits, specified respectively in sub-sections (1) and (3) of Section 198 of the Uttar Pradesh Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950.
(4) The Commissioner may of his own motion and shall, on the application of any aggrieved person enquire into such settlement and if he is satisfied that the settlement is irregular he may after notice to the person in whose favour such settlement is made to show cause--
(i) cancel the settlement and the lease, if any, and thereupon, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law or in any instrument, the rights, title and interest of the person in whose favour such settlement was made or lease executed or any person claiming through him in such land shall cease, and such land shall revert to the State Government; and
(ii) direct that every person holding or retaining possession thereof may be evicted, and may for that purpose use or cause to be used such force as may be necessary.
(5) Every order passed by the Commissioner under sub-section (4) shall be final.
(6) The Commissioner acting of his own motion under subsection (4) may issue notice, and an application under that sub-section may be made,--
(a) in the case of any settlement made or lease granted before November 10, 1980, before the expiry of a period of seven years from the said date; and
(b) in the case of any settlement made or lease granted on or after the said date, before the expiry of a period of five years from the date of such settlement or lease or up to November 10, 1987, whichever be later.
(6-A) Where any surplus land has been settled by the Collector under sub-section (3), and any person other than the person in whose favour such settlement was made is in occupation of such land in contravention of the provisions of this Act, the Collector may, of his own motion and shall on the application of the person in whose favour such settlement was made, put him in possession of such land and may for that purpose use or cause to be used such force as he considers necessary.
(6-B) Where any person, after being evicted under this section, reoccupies the land or any part thereof without lawful authority, he shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to two years but which shall not be less than three months and also with fine which may extend to three thousand rupees :
Provided that the Court convicting the accused may while passing the sentence direct that the whole or such portion of the fine that may be recovered as the Court considers proper, be paid to the person in whose favour such settlement was made as damages for use and occupation.
(6-C) Where in any proceeding under sub-section (6-B), the Court at any stage after cognizance of the case has been taken is satisfied by affidavit or otherwise--
(a) that the accused is in occupation of the land to which such proceeding relates, in contravention of the provisions of the Act; and
(b) that the person in whose favour such settlement was made is entitled to the possession of such land ;
the Court may summarily evict the accused from such land pending the final determination of the case and may put the person in whose favour such settlement was made in possession of such land.
(6-D) Where in any such proceeding, the accused is convicted the interim order passed under sub-section (6-C) shall be confirmed by the Court.
(6-E) Where in any such proceedings the accused is acquitted or discharged and the Court is satisfied that the person so acquitted or discharged is entitled to be put back in possession over such land, the Court shall, on the application of such person direct that delivery of possession be made to him.
(6-F) Notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, every offence punishable under sub-section (6-B) shall be cognizable and non-bailable and may be tried summarily.
(6-G) For the purpose of speedy trial of offences under this section, the State Government may, in consultation with the High Court, by notification/constitute, special courts consisting of an officer not below the rank of Sub-Divisional Magistrate, which shall, subject to the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, exercise in relation to such offences the powers of a Judicial Magistrate of the first class.
(7) The State Government may, by a general or special order to be published in the manner prescribed, declare that as from a date to be specified in this behalf, all surplus land situate in a circle which could not be settled under the provisions of this Act, shall vest in the Gram Sabha concerned, and the provisions of Section 117 of the Uttar Pradesh Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, shall mutatis mutandis apply in relation to such vesting."
7. In terms of sub-section (3) of Section 27 of the Ceiling Act the land remaining surplus after providing for the use thereof for community purposes by way of settlement with the Gaon Sabha in terms of sub-section (1) and for use for other public purposes in accordance with Section 25, is to be settled by the Collector in accordance with the order of preference and subject to the limits specified respectively in sub-sections (1) and (3) of Section 198 of the U.P.Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 19502.
8. Section 198 of the 1950 Act prescribes the order of preference to be followed in admitting persons to land under Sections 195 and 197 and the same is reproduced herein below :-
"198. Order of preference in admitting persons to land under Sections 195 and 197. - (1) In the admission of persons to land as bhumidhar with non-transferable rights or asami under Section 195 or Section 197 (hereinafter in this section referred to as allotment of land) the Land Management Committee shall, subject to any order made by a Court under Section 178 observe the following order of preference :
(a) landless widow, sons, unmarried daughters or parents residing in the circle of a person who has lost his life by enemy action while in active service in the Armed Forces of the Union;
(b) a person residing in the circle, who has become wholly disabled by enemy action while in active service in the Armed Forces of the Union;
(c) a landless agricultural labourer residing in the circle and belonging to any one of the following categories in the order of preference:-
(i) persons belonging to the Scheduled Castes or the Scheduled Tribes;
(ii) persons belonging to Other Backward Classes;
(iii) persons belonging to the general category living below poverty line.;
(d) any other landless agricultural labourer residing in the circle;
(e) a bhumidhar or asami residing in the circle and holding land less than 1.26 hectares (3.125 acres);
(f) a landless person residing in the circle who is retired, released or discharged from service other than service as an officer in the Armed Forces of the Union;
(g) a landless freedom fighter residing in the circle who has not been granted political pension; and
(h) any other landless agricultural labourer, not residing in the circle, but residing in the Nyaya Panchayat circle referred to in Section 42 of the United Provinces Panchayat Raj Act, 1947 and belonging to any of the following categories in the order of preference:-
(i) persons belonging to the Scheduled Castes or the Scheduled Tribes;
(ii) persons belonging to Other Backward Classes;
(iii) persons belonging to the general category living below poverty line.
Explanation. - For the purposes of this sub-section-
(1) 'landless' refers to a person who or whose spouse or minor children hold no land as bhumidhar, or asami and also held no land as such within two years immediately preceding the date of allotment; and (2) 'agricultural labourer' means a person whose main source of livelihood is agricultural labour;
(3) 'Freedom-Fighter' means an inhabitant of Uttar Pradesh who is certified by the Collector to have participated in the National struggle for freedom during the period between 1930 and 1947 and who in connection with such participation, is similarly certified to have-
(a) undergone a sentence of imprisonment for a period of at least two months; or
(b) been in jail for a period of at least three months by way of preventive detention or as an undertrial; or
(c) been subjected to at least ten stripes in execution of a sentence of whipping; or
(d) been declared an absconding offender; or
(e) suffered a bullet injury;
and includes a person who was involved in the Peshawar-Khand or who was a recognised member of the Indian National Army or former India Independence League; but does not include a person who was granted pardon on account of his tendering apology or expressing regret for such participation.
(4) 'Other Backward Classes' means the Backward Classes of citizens specified in Schedule I of the Uttar Pradesh Public Services (Reservation for Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward Classes) Act, 1994 (U.P. Act No. 4 of 1994).
(5) 'Persons of General Category living below poverty line' means such persons as may be determined from time to time by the State Government.
(2) (Omitted by U.P.Act No. 30 of 1975).
(3) The land that may be allotted under sub-section (1) shall not exceed-
(i) in the case of a person falling under Clause (e) such area as together with the land held by him as bhumidhar or asami immediately before the allotment would aggregate to 1.26 hectares (3.125 acres);
(ii) in any other case, an area of 1.26 hectares (3.125 acres).
(4) The Collector may of his own motion and shall on the application of any person aggrieved by an allotment of land inquire in the manner prescribed into such allotment and if he is satisfied that the allotment is irregular, he may cancel the allotment and the lease, if any.
(4-A) (Omitted by U.P.Act No. 27 of 2004 (w.e.f. 23.08.2004).
(5) No order for cancellation of an allotment or lease shall be made under sub-section (4), unless a notice to show cause is served on the person in whose favour the allotment or lease was made or on his legal representatives :
Provided that no such notice shall be necessary in proceedings for the cancellation of any allotment or lease where such proceedings were pending before the Collector or any other Court or authority on August 18, 1980.
(6) Every notice to show cause mentioned in sub-section (5) may be issued-
(a) in the case of an allotment of land made before November 10, 1980, (hereinafter referred to as the said date), before the expiry of a period of seven years from the said date; and
(b) in the case of an allotment of land made on or after the said date, before the expiry of a period of five years from the date of such allotment or lease or up to November 10, 1987, which ever be later.
(7) Where the allotment or lease of any land is cancelled under sub-section (4) the following consequences shall ensue, namely-
(i) the right, title and interest of the allottee or lessee or any other person claiming through him in such land shall case and the land shall revert to the Gaon Sabha;
(ii) the Collector may direct delivery of possession of such land forthwith to the Gaon Sabha after ejectment of every person holding or retaining possession thereof and may for that purpose use or cause to be used such force as may be necessary.
(8) Every order made by the Collector under sub-section (4) shall, subject to the provisions of Section 333, be final.
(9) Where any person has been admitted to any land specified in Section 132 as a sirdar or bhumidhar with non-transferable rights at any time before the said date and such admission was made with the previous approval of the Assistant Collector-in-charge of the sub-division in respect of the permissible area mentioned in sub-section (3), then notwithstanding anything contained in other provisions of this Act or in the terms and conditions of the allotment or lease under which such person was admitted to that land, the following consequences shall, with effect from the said date ensure, namely-
(a) the allottee or lessee shall be deemed to be an asami of such land and shall be deemed to be holding the same from year to year and the allotment or lease of the land to the extent mentioned above shall not be deemed to be irregular for the purposes of sub-section (4);
(b) the proceedings, if any, pending on the said date before the Collector or any other Court or authority for the cancellation of the allotment or lease of such land, shall abate."
9. Section 195 which provides for allotment of land is also being extracted below :-
"195. Admission to land. - The Land Management Committee with the previous approval of the Assistant Collector-in-charge of the sub-division shall have the right to admit any person as bhumidhar with non-transferable rights to any land (other than land being in any of the classes mentioned in Section 132) where-
(a) the land is vacant land;
(b) the land is vested in the Gaon Sabha under Section 117; or
(c) the land has come into the possession of Land Management Committee under Section 194 or under any other provisions of this Act."
10. A conjoint reading of the aforementioned statutory provisions indicates that any land which remains surplus after making provisions for settlement of land with the Gaon Sabha under sub-section (1) of Section 27 and permitting the use thereof for other public purposes under Section 25, is to be settled by the Collector in accordance with the order of preference and subject to the limits specified respectively in sub-sections (1) and (3) of Section 198 of the 1950 Act.
11. The order of preference provided under sub-section (1) of Section 198 provides for allotment in favour of landless agricultural labourers of the specified categories in the order of preference prescribed under clause (c) thereof.
12. Section 195 provides for admission of land other than land being in any of the classes mentioned in Section 132 where: (a) the land is vacant land; (b) the land is vested in the Gaon Sabha under Section 117; or (c) the land has come into the possession of Land Management Committee under Section 194 or under any other provisions of the Act.
13. Sub-section (4) of Section 27 of the Ceiling Act provides that the Commissioner may of his own motion and shall on the application of any aggrieved person enquire into such settlement and if he is satisfied that the settlement is irregular he may after notice to the person in whose favour such settlement is made to show cause cancel the settlement and the lease and as a consequence thereof the land shall revert to the State Government.
14. The U.P. Imposition of Ceiling on Land Holdings Act, 1960 was promulgated as an Act to provide for imposition of ceiling on land holdings in the State of Uttar Pradesh and certain other matters connected therewith. The enactment having been made in the interests of the community with the object to ensure a more equitable distribution of land and to provide land for the landless agricultural labourers to ensure increased agricultural production and for other public purposes as best to subserve the common good, the provisions of the Act have to be read in a manner so as to subserve the intent and purpose of the enactment.
15. Land being pivotal to both income and employment around which socio-economic privileges and deprivations revolve the distribution of ceiling surplus land is seen as an instrument of land reforms aimed at creation of an egalitarian rural society. The enactment has been included in the Ninth Schedule of the Constitution of India so as to ensure speedy and unhindered implementation of the various legislative measures.
16. Imposition of ceiling and distribution of ceiling surplus land being therefore primarily concerned with the distributive aspect of land reforms aimed at reducing ineqalities of land owner-ship the allotment of ceiling surplus land is to be made in a manner to subserve the objects and purposes of the enactment so that the distribution of land is made to the real beneficiaries.
17. It is beyond question the duty of courts, in construing statutes to give effect to the intent of the law making power and to seek for that intent in every way. The object and interpretation of construction of statutes is to ascertain the meaning of the legislature and to ensure that the provisions are interpreted so as to subserve that intent. There is a general presumption that an enactment has to be given a purposive construction with a construction that best gives effect to the purpose of the enactment.
18. Reference may be had to the judgment in R (on the application of Quintavalle) Vs. Secretary of State for Health3, for the proposition that in construing an enactment effort should be made to give effect to the legislative purpose. The observations made in the judgment are as follows:-
''8. The basic task of the Court is to ascertain and give effect to the true meaning of what Parliament has said in the enactment to be construed. ... Every statute other than a pure consolidating statute is, after all, enacted to make some change, or address some problem, or remove some blemish, or effect some improvement in the national life. The Court's task, within the permissible bounds of interpretation, is to give effect to Parliament's purpose. So the controversial provisions should be read in the context of the statute as a whole, and the statute as a whole should be read in the historical context of the situation which led to its enactment.''
19. The Court's function, in view of the foregoing discussion, would thus be to construe the words used in an enactment, so far as possible, in a way which best gives effect to the purpose of the enactment.
20. The principle of construing a remedial statute so as to effectuate the purposes of the legislature and to accomplish the object sought has been emphasised in the Construction of Statues by Crawford4 in the following terms:-
"...Remedial statutes, that is, those which supply defects, and abridge superfluities, in the former law, should be given a liberal construction, in order to effectuate the purposes of the legislature, or to advance the remedy intended, or to accomplish the object sought, and all matters fairly within the scope of such a statute be included, even though outside the letter, if within its spirit or reason."
21. Reference may also be had to the case of Bharat Singh Vs. Management Of New Delhi Tuberculosis Centre, New Delhi & Ors.5, where purposive interpretation safeguarding the rights of have-nots was preferred to a literal construction in interpreting a welfare legislation, and it was held as follows:-
"11. ...the court has to evolve the concept of purposive interpretation which has found acceptance whenever a progressive social beneficial legislation is under review. We share the view that where the words of a statute are plain and unambiguous effect must be given to them. Plain words have to be accepted as such but where the intention of the legislature is not clear from the words or where two constructions are possible, it is the court's duty to discern the intention in the context of the background in which a particular Section is enacted. Once such an intention is ascertained the courts have necessarily to give the statute a purposeful or a functional interpretation. Now, it is trite to say that acts aimed at social amelioration giving benefits for the have-nots should receive liberal construction. It is always the duty of the court to give such a construction to a statute as would promote the purpose or object of the Act. A construction that promotes the purpose of the legislation should be preferred to a literal construction. A construction which would defeat the rights of the have-nots and the underdog and which would lead to injustice should always be avoided..."
22. In the instant case the order passed by the Additional Commissioner has specifically recorded that the petitioners were not eligible for grant of lease inasmuch as they did not belong to the class of landless agricultural labourers they could not have been admitted to the land as per the order of preference in accordance with the provisions contained under Section 195 read with Section 198 of the 1950 Act and as such the settlement of the surplus land under sub-section (3) of Section 27 was irregular. It has further been recorded that the land in question being already in occupation of landless agricultural labourers belonging to scheduled castes, the land could not be said to be vacant and the same could not have been allotted to the petitioners.
23. The principal contention which is sought to be raised on behalf of the petitioners is that the order has been passed without notice and opportunity to the petitioners also does not inspire confidence inasmuch as the order-sheet of the case which is on record as part of the counter affidavit filed by the State respondents clearly shows that the order impugned has been passed after due notice and opportunity to the petitioners.
24. Counsel for the petitioners has not been able to demonstrate from the records that the petitioners belong to the eligible criteria so as to be entitled for allotment of the ceiling surplus land.
25. No other ground has been urged.
26. No material error or irregularity has been pointed out in the order impugned so as to warrant interference.
27. The writ petition lacks merit and is accordingly dismissed.
Order Date :- 8.1.2020 Pratima (Dr.Y.K.Srivastava,J.)