Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

c) The Subject Land was not alienable either under the Laoni Rules of 1950 or under the revised land assignment rules of 1958 and hence it comes under the definition of ‘assigned land’ as provided in the 1977 Act. The issue of applicability of regulatory regime on the assigned land stood settled by this Court’s judgement in Gudepu Sailoo5 whose relevant part in this context reads as follows:– “….Thus, under the original Laoni Rules, 1950 as also under the Revised Policy published in 1958, the alienation of the assigned land was prohibited. While under the Laoni Rules, 1950, the alienation or Gudepu Sailoo (n 3).

             transfer    without   the    previous
             sanction    of  the   Collector   was

prohibited, under the Revised Policy, it was clearly provided that though the assigned lands would be heritable, they would not be transferred…”

d) The Division Bench also distinguished the decision of a co­ordinate bench of the High Court in Letter sent from Plot No.338, Parvant Nagar v. the Collector and District Magistrate6 wherein it was held that land assigned under Rule 9 of Laoni Rules of 1950 by way of market value collection would not be hit by the provisions of the 1977 Act whereunder alienation of assigned land was prohibited. It was specifically noted that the Subject Land was granted free of cost to the Assignees without any action or payment of market value as evisaged under Form 9(G) of the Laoni Rules of 1950 which was relied upon by the Appellants. The Division Bench, therefore, upheld the condition mentioned in Letter sent from Plot No.338, Parvant Nagar v. the Collector and District Magistrate 2008 SCC OnLine AP 477.

(2) The Government may also at its discretion from time to time notify by Official Gazette, that any part or person or class of persons of such village or tract of the area to which this Act extends to which the provisions of sub­section (1) have been made applicable shall be exempt from the said provisions.”  Similarly, we may also refer to the relevant rules regarding ‘Special Laoni’ as mentioned in the Laoni Rules of 1950 which are as follows:– “ Special Laoni

33. In the end, Mr. Tripurari Ray learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Appellants raised a contention for the first time at this stage by relying on the decision of this Court in Yeshwant Deorao LAO cum Revenue Divisional Officer, Chevella Division v Mekala Pandu 2004 SCC OnLine AP 217.

Deshmukh v Walchand Ramchand Kothari11. He contended that the Laoni Rules of 1950 created an artificial classification among two classes – namely those who were granted regular patta under Rule 2 to 14 of these Rules through the bidding process which was alienable and the landless or poor people who were granted special patta under Rule 15 to 24 of Laoni Rules of 1950 with a bar on the alienability and obligation of an Assignee to cultivate the land. He contended that this amounted to ‘class legislation’ which discriminated against the Assignees and violated their fundamental rights under Article 14 of the Constitution.