Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

9. The contentions of Sri Vedula Venkata Ramana, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioners are fourfold and the same are as follows:

i) To apply the provision contained in Section 22(A) of the Registration Act, 1908 and consequently prohibit the registration of sale of the assigned lands by the Government to landless poor persons subject to the condition of non-

alienation.

ii) Impugned endorsement of respondent No.2 only refers to the Special Laoni Rules of Laoni Rules, 1950, which are issued under Section 172 of the Telangana Land Revenue Act 1317 Fasli. The Laoni Rules do not anywhere specify that the grant thereunder is non-alienable. The rules are to be read in conjunction with Section 58 of the Telangana Land Revenue Act 1317 Fasli.

13. It is also relevant to note that a Division Bench of this Court in State of Telangana, represented by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department v. Dakoji Durgapathy 1 had an occasion to deal with the subject matter including provisions of Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers) Act, 1977 (for brevity 'POT Act') and Laoni Rules. In the said case, assignment of lands was not under the Laoni Rules, 1954 and there was no condition of non- alienation. On examination of the facts therein and also considering the provisions of the POT Act and Laoni Rules, Division Bench held that a land to be treated as an assigned land, within the meaning of POT Act, should be burdened with a condition of non-alienation. In the absence of the said clause, the property cannot be included in the prohibitory list.

22. Laoni Rules, 1950 are very clear that when the land is occupied with prior written permission of the competent authority on payment of an up-set price equal to 16 times of the land revenue, the permanent patta will be granted and the same will be treated on par with the other patta lands and can be transferred.

23. On the other hand, the Government had made special provisions under the Special Laoni Rules for the landless persons and backward classes, who are not capable of purchasing lands in laoni auctions wherein the lands will be assigned to such persons on free of cost so as to bring the Government vacant lands into cultivation and providing livelihood to the landless persons. The said lands are not alienable as the very purpose of bringing the Special Laoni Rules in existence is to provide opportunity to do agriculture and to derive its benefits from the lands so assigned. If the lands are made alienable, the very objective of the Government to provide lands to the landless persons will be defeated. The title of the said lands always vests with the Government and they are prohibited from alienation to the third parties. Therefore, considering the said aspects respondent No.2-District Collector rejected the request made by the petitioners.

27. As rightly contended by Sri Vedula Venkata Ramana, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioners, the rules do not anywhere specify that the grant thereunder is non-alienable. The rules are to be read in conjunction with the Telangana Land Revenue Act 1317 Fasli and Section 58 of POT Act.

28. An occupancy right to land shall be deemed to be heritable and transferable. In Section 58(A) of the POT Act which is applicable to the notified areas, the occupancy is not transferrable without obtaining the previous sanction of the Collector. Therefore, the parent statute clearly specifies laoni rules, shall be heritable and transferrable. Thus, the parent statute i.e., Telangana Land Revenue Act permits transferability of the occupancy. The Special Laoni Rules are part of Loani Rules, 1950. Rules 15 to 20 do not contain any condition of non-alienability. On a combined reading of the Telangana Land Revenue Act, 1317 Fasli, Laoni Rules, 1950 and Section 5 of POT Act, it is crystal clear that in the case of grant under Laoni Rules or Special Laoni Rules, there is any statutory prescription of condition of inalienability of the land covered by the Laoni patta or special laoni patta. Therefore, in respect of the subject properties section 22A(1)(a) of the Registration Act did not attract. The said principle was also held by two division benches viz., Letter sent from Plot No.338, Parvant Nagar, Hyderabad v. The Collector and District Magistrate, Rangareddy District 5 and State of Telangana (1 supra).