R. RAMAKRISHNA, J. ( 1 ) ONE important question that requires consideration in this revision is:"whether the finding by the assistant charity commissioner, belgaum, that the lease deed dated 20-4-1965 under section 36 of the Bombay Public Trust Act, 1950, would take away the right of a tenant under the lease deed, to claim occupancy rights under the Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1961 as amended by act no. 1 of 1974?" ( 2 ) THE facts in brief, are as follows: sy. No. 357/2 measuring 10 acres and 33 guntas in the tenanted land of petitioner's father and one rangacharya by virtue of a registered sale deed dated 20-4-1965 executed by the father of the second respondent as a pujari on behalf of deity lakshminarayana temple, registered under Bombay Public Trust Act, 1950 (in short 'trust act' ). ( 3 ) THE lease was for a period of 10 years. The terms of the lease was that the lessee should pay a sum of Rs. 935/- as an advocate which is repayable to the lessee after ten years along with a sum of Rs. 465/ -. The lessor agreed to give half crops grown or its value during the subsistence of the lease. ( 4 ) WHEN this being the position, respondent no. 3 who is the son of gundo, the lessor on behalf of deity, has moved the assistant charity commissioner, belgaum, to declare the lease as invalid under section 36 of the trust act on the allegation that the lease is for more than 10 years which is impermissible under section 36 unless previous sanction obtained by the charity commissioner. Section 36 reads thus:"alienation of immovable property of public trust: subject to the directions in the instrument of trust (a) no sale, mortgage, exchange or gift of any immovable property; and (b) no lease for a period exceeding ten years in the case of agricultural land or for a period exceeding three years in the case of non-agricultural land or a building; belonging to a public trust, shall be valid without the previous sanction of the charity commissioner. " ( 5 ) THE assistant charity commissioner after conducting an enquiry in miscellaneous inquiry no. 21 of 1971 declared the lease as invalid vide order dated 4-6-1971. This order is at si. No. 97 of the records. " ( 5 ) THE assistant charity commissioner after conducting an enquiry in miscellaneous inquiry no. 21 of 1971 declared the lease as invalid vide order dated 4-6-1971. This order is at si. No. 97 of the records. In this inquiry, two more persons are the parties connected to their lease deed in respect of some other survey numbers. The petitioners inspite of this order, continued their possession as tenants in the suit land. To protect their possession, they have filed civil suits. One of the suit was for recovery of the advance amount paid to the father of the third respondent. ( 6 ) CONSEQUENT to the Amendment act 1 of 1974 form no. 7 was filed before the land tribunal, bagalkot, for occupancy rights of the suit land. The land tribunal once rejected their applications. This order was set aside by this court in a writ petition and the matter was remitted back to the land tribunal for fresh enquiry. In the second round, the land tribunal allowed the applications and conferred occupancy rights in favour of the petitioners as at that time both the applicants have died during the pendency of the case. ( 7 ) THE land tribunal taken into consideration the registered lease deed dated 20-4-1965, the proof of payment of half-crop towards yearly rents and the admission of tenancy. The finding of the assistant charity commissioner was not considered to disentitle their rights for registration. ( 8 ) THIS order and other orders of the tribunal was challenged before the land reforms appellate authority (in short 'lraa'), bagalkot, the appeal connected to this petitioner is lra (tr) 178 of 1987. The lraa allowed the appeal and set aside the order of the land tribunal. The only ground considered by the tribunal was, the effect of the order passed by the assistant charity commissioner. According to the tribunal, when once the lease was declared invalid, the possession would become illegal and such possession cannot be considered for conferring occupancy rights. ( 9 ) SRI a. Ananda setty, learned advocate for the petitioner has assailed the order of the lraa as legally unsustainable as it failed to consider the object of land reforms act in extending the benefit to a tenant and committed an error solely depending on the findings of the assistant charity commissioner to deprive the petitioner of his right to get the land. ( 10 ) SRI s. r. nayak, learned advocate for the second respondent, while supporting the order of the lraa, has contended that the matter does not require reconsideration as the lease deed held to be invalid which commences from the date of its execution and therefore, the petitioner was not a tenant as defined under the act on the appointed date. ( 11 ) SRI ananda setty, learned advocate, submits that the order of the assistant charity commissioner in respect of the lease deed of the petitioner, though assailable, the petitioner has not challenged the said order. But there is no bar to decide the legality of the said order even in this petition as the lraa has failed to give reason to disentitle the petitioner on the basis of the said order. ( 12 ) FIRST we have to examine the justification of the order by the assistant charity commissioner and the effect of such order. ( 13 ) THE scheme of the Bombay Public Trust Act, 1950 is to regulate and to make better provision for the administration of public religious and charitable trust in the State of bombay. At the relevant point of time, this act was extended to bijapur district also. Consequent to this Act, the charity commissioners were appointed to administer this law in accordance with the preamble. Under section 36, alienation of immovable property of public trust is dealt with and some limitations were imposed to the alienation of these properties. There is absolute bar for sale, mortgage, exchange or gift of any immovable property. In respect of lease of agricultural land, the period of lease shall not exceed 10 years. To overcome this limitation, previous sanction of the charity commissioner is necessary under the act. The Act, however, does not say the consequences for such violations. ( 14 ) THE petitioner has not filed any appeal or revision against the findings of the charity commissioner as there is no provision under the act. ( 15 ) SECTION 36 of the trust act itself has not provided for an appeal. The Act, however, does not say the consequences for such violations. ( 14 ) THE petitioner has not filed any appeal or revision against the findings of the charity commissioner as there is no provision under the act. ( 15 ) SECTION 36 of the trust act itself has not provided for an appeal. Section 70 makes a provision for an appeal against the finding or order of the deputy or assistant charity commissioner rendered under sections 20, 22, 22-a, 28, 54 and 79-a. ( 16 ) THE contention of Sri s. r. nayak, learned advocate is that, since the charity commissioner held the lease deed as not legal, by his order dated 4-6-1971, the lease deed became illegal from the date of its execution. In support of this contention reliance was placed in chandrabhan chunnilal gour v Dr. r. Sharawan kumar khunnolal gour and another. In this decision, the word "previous" has been defined, occurring in section 36 by a learned single judge of Bombay High Court and it was held:"the legislature has used the word "previous" before the word "sanction" which clearly means that the sanction contemplated by section 36 (1) has to be obtained from the charity commissioner before the transaction is completed. . . . . Ex post facto sanction obtained after the sale transaction is not sanction at All in the eye of law and the transaction would not be valid as provided for in section 36 (1 ). " ( 17 ) THE copy of the lease deed was not produced before any of the authorities below. But the recitals narrated here and there show that it was for a period of 10 years. A "condition subsequent" was stipulated for extension in case of some contingency. Such contingency clause was incorporated due to advance cash payment made to the lessor. This condition subsequent is to take effect only if such contingency is not fulfilled. Hence the assistant charity commissioner was wrong in holding that the lease was for more than 10 years. A "condition subsequent" was stipulated for extension in case of some contingency. Such contingency clause was incorporated due to advance cash payment made to the lessor. This condition subsequent is to take effect only if such contingency is not fulfilled. Hence the assistant charity commissioner was wrong in holding that the lease was for more than 10 years. ( 18 ) NEXT question is, even if it were to be held that the finding of the assistant charity commissioner held to be valid, in view of the petitioner continued in possession of the land in the capacity as a tenant and also in the absence of any action initiated by virtue of the said order, what status the petitioner hold under land reforms act? ( 19 ) THE preamble of the act shows that the intendment of legislature is to enact an uniform law relating to a grarian relations, conferment of ownership on tenants, ceiling on land holdings and such other matters connected thereto. The act extends to whole of karnataka. SECTION 2 (21) defines " "land-owner" as an owner of land and includes a trustee or mortgagee with possession there- of;" section 2 (34) defines "tenant" as "tenant" means an agriculturist who cultivates personally the land he holds on lease from a landlord and includes, (i) a person who is deemed to be a tenant under section 4; (ii) a person who was protected from eviction from any land by the Karnataka Tenants (Temporary Protection From Eviction) Act, 1961; (ii-a) a person who cultivates personally any land on lease under a lease created contrary to the provisions of section 5 and before the date of commencement of the Amendment act; (iii) a person who is a permanent tenant; and (iv) a person who is a protected tenant. " ( 20 ) EXCEPT as prohibited under section 5 of the Act, All the leases come within the purview of the act. The tenancy created will not be terminated by efflux of time under section 6 of the act. ( 21 ) CHAPTER iii of the act made substantial changes to protect the interest of the tenants of agricultural lands. Section 44 (l) (2) (a) makes the position clear. "44. Vesting of land in the state government. The tenancy created will not be terminated by efflux of time under section 6 of the act. ( 21 ) CHAPTER iii of the act made substantial changes to protect the interest of the tenants of agricultural lands. Section 44 (l) (2) (a) makes the position clear. "44. Vesting of land in the state government. (1) All lands held by or in the possession of tenants (including tenants against whom a decree or order for eviction or a certificate for resumption is made or issued) immediately prior to the date of commencement of the Amendment Act, other than lands held by them under leases permitted under section 5, shall, with effect on and from the said date, stand transferred to and vest in the state government. (2) notwithstanding anything in any decree or order of or certificate issued by any court or authority directing or specifying the lands which may be resumed or in any contract, grant or other instrument or in any other law for the time being in force, with effect on and from the date of vesting and save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, the following consequences shall ensue, namely: (a) All rights, title and interest vesting in the owners of such lands and other persons interested in such lands shall cease and be vested absolutely in the state government free from All encumbrances;" ( 22 ) SECTION 45 envisages as to how a tenant is to be registere das occupants of the lands which they hold as tenants. ( 23 ) SECTION 107 of the Act, before the Amendment act no. 1 of the 1974 came into force, has specifically excluded lands held on lease from religious or charitable institutions to come under the purview of the Act, formed before 18-11-1961 and in existence on the date of commencement of the mysore land reforms (Amendment) Act, 1965. ( 24 ) ACT No. 1 of 1974 brought a far-reaching change by excluding some transactions from the purview of the act. This Amendment totally excluded the limitations applied under the Amendment Act, 1965. The overriding effect of this act over other enactments is stated under section 138 of the act. ( 25 ) THE position of the petitioner as a tenant continued by virtue of lease deed for the full period of 10 years which was due to expire on 20-4-1975. This Amendment totally excluded the limitations applied under the Amendment Act, 1965. The overriding effect of this act over other enactments is stated under section 138 of the act. ( 25 ) THE position of the petitioner as a tenant continued by virtue of lease deed for the full period of 10 years which was due to expire on 20-4-1975. His position was not disturbed even after the order of assistant charity commissioner. Due to act no. 1 of 1974, this tenanted land vested in the state government by virtue of section 44. The possession of the petitioner is protected under the act and he cannot be evicted under any law due to the protection rendered under the act. Section 44 (1) protects from eviction even when a decree is obtained for eviction. There is no material that possession was obtained from the petitioner. The petitioner continues to be in possession even after the lease held to be invalid by the assistant charity commissioner. ( 26 ) IN view of this change in law, the Karnataka landre forms act prevails over the Bombay Public Trust Act, in the matter of tenancy is concerned and the order of the assistant charity commissioner does not render the possession of the petitioner unlawful. In the result, this civil revision petition is allowed. The order of the land reforms appellate authority, bagalkot, bijapur district, dated 19-2-1988 passed in lra (tr) no. 178 of 1987 is hereby set aside. The order of the land tribunal, bagalkot, in case no. Klr:t:sr:457, dated 14-11-1986 is hereby restored. The second respondent should bear the costs of the petitioner throughout. --- *** --- .