Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

2. Petitioner's had challenged aforesaid circular and letter on grounds that same are illegal, arbitrary and contrary to law. It is submitted that said circular and letter is contrary to circular dated 3.3.2010 and 14.10.2014. By said circular directions were issued pursuant to declaration of Chief Minister that Kotwars will be given Bhoomi Swami Rights over land which was given to them by Malgujars for rendering service. In said circular, reference has been given to letter no.9-19/90/7 Bhopal dated 4.2.1999 and letter dated 2-6/07/7-1 dated 23.2.2008 wherein directions were given that lands given to Kotwars by Malgujars for personal service shall be examined and Collector has to determine whether any land was given to Kotwars by Malgujars for doing personal service.

3.Facts from W.P No.1158/2019 are taken up to decide identical issue between the parties.

4. Petitioner is Gram Kotwar of Village Aathner, District Betul and he was occupancy tenant over Khasra No.187 Area 2.3310 Hectare. Since petitioner and his forefathers were Kotwars were given service land and they are occupancy tenant (Marushi Krishak) since 1917-18, therefore, they have acquired Bhoomi Swami rights over land . Reliance was also placed on orders passed by this Court in Shankarlal and others vs. Collector, District Narsinghpur and others ( W.P No.939/2009, Tulsiram Chadar vs. State of M.P. and others, (W.A No.682/20185) and Teekaram and others vs. State of M.P. and others, (W.P No.2064/2000) dated 3.5.2001. Relying on said judgments, it was submitted that circular of State Government dated 28.2.2017 and letter of S.D.O dated 13.11.2017 be quashed.

5. Respondents had filed their reply and they adopted the return filed in W.P No.19433/2017 ( Tulsiram Chadar vs. State of M.P. and others) in all Writ Petitions. It was submitted that as per Madhya Pradesh Swamitwa Adhikaro (Malikana Hak) (Ilako, Mohalla, Dumala Bhumi) Ka Aant Karne Ka Adhiniyam, 1950, Gram Kotwar is holding two types of land, one is for village service and second for personal service of the Malgujars. If land was given to Kotwar by Malgujars for personal service then said Kotwar will be occupancy tenant in view of Section 45(3) of the Adhiniyam of 1950 and land which was given to Kotwars for village service, then he is holding it from the State as service land and this will be governed by Central Province Tenancy Act, 1920. In case of service land given to Kotwar for village service, he will not acquire the status of occupancy tenant and he does not acquire any right over such land and said land is attached to post of Kotwar. Petitioners are holding land's for village service on behalf of Malgujars/Jamindars and after abolition of said system, all lands belonged to State, therefore, petitioners are not occupancy tenant and Bhoomi Swami rights are not conferred on them, therefore, Writ Petitions be dismissed.

(c) in such area beyond the outer limit of urban area, as notified by the State Government, shall cease to be service land from the date as notified by State Government and the Tahsildar shall cause necessary changes in the land records.] "

10. In view of provisions of Section 183(6) of the Code, Tehsildar has jurisdiction and power to make necessary changes in revenue record if service land situated in urban area or in such area where development plan has been approved or in such area beyond outer limit of urban area as notified by State Government. Circular dated 28.2.2017 which has been issued to all Collectors by Principal Secretary, Govt. of M.P. Revenue Department, is in consonance with Section 183(6) of the Code, and direction were only issued in accordance with the Code. Circular nowhere states that land of Malgujars in which Kotwar had acquired Bhoomi Swami rights be entered in revenue record as land belonging to State Government. Letter dated 13.11.2017 has been issued by S.D.O to Tehsildar pursuant to circular dated 28.2.2017, therefore, no illegality is found in said circular. If petitioners have acquired Bhoomi Swami rights then they are at liberty to establish said rights before Collector. Petitioners had challenged the circular of State Government and letters and no illegality or arbitrariness is found in order circular and letters. Collector has not examined rights of Kotwar and conferral of Bhoomi Swami rights on them by virtue of being occupancy tenant.