Research › Browse › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

1995 DIGILAW 238 (GAU)

Manindra Chandra Sarkar v. State of Tripura

1995-11-02

A.K.PATNAIK

body1995
This is an application under Article 226 of the Constitution for quashing the order dated 3.2.89 of the Sub-Divisional Officer, South Tripura issuing a notice to the petitioner to show cause as to why the allotment of land measuring 0.24 acres in Khatian 881 and Dag 1229 of Mouza Rangamati made in his favour shall not be cancelled under Rule 12 of the Tripura Land Revenue and Land Reforms (Allotment of Land) Rules, 1980. 2. The facts very briefly are that the petitioner was allotted the aforesaid land by an allotment sanctioned under Order No. 146 (12)776 dated 4.8.1976 by the SDO, Amarpur under section 14(1) of the Tripura Land Revenue and Land Reforms Act, 1960 (for short the 1960 Act). The petitioner's case in the writ petition is that after his retirement from service he is residing at Calcutta with his son and his son-in-law is looking after the said land. But surprisingly an enquiry was conducted by the Revenue Inspector, Amarpur behind the back of the petitioner and an enquiry report dated 3.2.89 was submitted by the Revenue Inspector, Amarpur to the Sub Divisional Officer, Amarpur stating that the petitioner has not entered the said land and the land is lying vacant since long time. On the said enquiry report dated 3.2.89, the Sub-Divisional Officer, Amrapur passed the impugned order dated 3.2.89 directing issue of a notice to the petitioner and pursuant to the said order the petitioner received a notice dated 3.2.89 asking him to show cause as to why the aforesaid land allotted in his favour shall not be cancelled under Rule 12 of the Tripura Land Revenue and Land Reforms (Allotment of Land) Rules, 1980 (for short the 1980 Rules). 3. I have heard Mr. S. Deb, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. UB Saha, learned Govt Advocate. 4. Mr. Deb submitted that, the allotment sanctioned in favour of the petitioner in the year 1976 was under the Tripura Land Revenue and Land Reforms (Allotment of Land) Rules, 1962 (for short the 1962 Rules) and accordingly the conditions laid down in the 1962 Rules were applicable to the allotment in question. UB Saha, learned Govt Advocate. 4. Mr. Deb submitted that, the allotment sanctioned in favour of the petitioner in the year 1976 was under the Tripura Land Revenue and Land Reforms (Allotment of Land) Rules, 1962 (for short the 1962 Rules) and accordingly the conditions laid down in the 1962 Rules were applicable to the allotment in question. In the year 1980, however, the 1980 Rules were notified and were brought into force and Rule 15 of the said 1980 Rules expressly provided that anything in the 1980 Rules shall not affect any previous order of allotment passed and any rights, privilege, obligation not liability acquired, accrued or incurred under the 1962 Rules. Accordingly, the provisions of the 1980 Rules could not alter the conditions imposed in any allotment made under the 1962 Rules. According to Mr. Deb, therefore, the provisions of the 1980 Rules and in particular Rule 12 thereof cannot invoked to cancel an allotment made in favour of the petitioner under the 1962 Rules. In support of the said submission, Mr. Deb also relied on the express language of Rule 12 of the 1980 Rules, which states that any allotment of land made sub-section (1) of section 14 of the 1960 Act and in accordance with the 1980 Rules shall be further subject to the conditions mentioned in Rule 12 of the 1980 Rules as well as the conditions specified in the allotment order made under the 1980 Rules. Hence, the impugned order of the Sub-Divisional Officer, Amarpur issuing a notice to the petitioner to show cause as to why the allotment of the land made in favour of the petitioner under the 1962 Rules shall not be cancelled cannot be founded on the aforesaid Rule 12 of the 1980 Rules and is therefore without jurisdiction. 5. I find full force in the aforesaid submission of Mr. Deb, Rules 12 and 15 of the 1980 Rules are extracted herein below : "Rule 12. Any allotment of land under sub-section (1) of section 14 and in accordance with these rules, shall be further subject to the following conditions and also the conditions specified in the allotment order as in Appendix 'B'. Deb, Rules 12 and 15 of the 1980 Rules are extracted herein below : "Rule 12. Any allotment of land under sub-section (1) of section 14 and in accordance with these rules, shall be further subject to the following conditions and also the conditions specified in the allotment order as in Appendix 'B'. (i) The land will be heritable but not alienable without the written consent of the Collector granted on the recommendation of the Advisory Committee that may-be set up by the Government: Provided that the land may be mortgaged to the Government, or a co-operative society or a bank or such institution as may be notified in the Official Gazette by the State Government from time to time. (ii) The allottee may surrender the land in the manner specified in the allotment order. (iii) The allottee shall bring the whole area under cultivation within the time specified in the allotment order. (iv) The allottee shall be iiable to pay premium, land revenue and taxes as specified in the allotment order. (v) The allottee shall be entitled to plant trees on his land to enjoy the products thereof and to fell, utilise or dispose of the timber of any trees on his land. (vi) The allotment will be liable to be cancelled for breach of any of the provisions of the Act, the rules or any of the conditions of allotment. Rule 15. Nothing in these rules shall affect any previous order of allotment passed and any right, privilege obligation or liability acquired, accrued or incurred under the Tripura Land Revenue and Land Reforms (Allotment of Land) Rules, 1962." A plain reading of the aforesaid Rule 12 of the 1980 Rules makes it clear that an allotment) of land made under sub-section (1) of section 14 of the 1960 Act and in accordance with the 1980 Rules only would be subject to the conditions specified in Rule 12 of the 1980 Rules. Accordingly an allotment of land under sub-section (1) of section 14 of the 1960 Act made in accordance with the 1962 Rules would not be subject to the conditions specified in Rule 12 of the 1980 Rules. Accordingly an allotment of land under sub-section (1) of section 14 of the 1960 Act made in accordance with the 1962 Rules would not be subject to the conditions specified in Rule 12 of the 1980 Rules. This conclusion is further reinforced by the fact that in Rule 15 of the 1980 Rules, orders of allotment under the 1962 Rules have been expressly saved from the operation of the 1980 Rules and it has been stated therein that any rights, privilege, obligation or liability acquired, accrued or incurred under the 1962 Rules shall not be affected by the 1980 Rules. This being the position of law, I am of the considered opinion that the Sub Divisional Officer, Amarpur could not resort to the provisions of Rule 12 of the 1980 Rules to cancel the allotment of land made in favour of the petitioner under the 1962 Rules. Thus the impugned order dated 3.2.89 of the Sub Divisional Officer, Amarpur, South Tripura directing issue of notice to the petitioner to show cause as to why the allotment of the aforesaid land made in favour of the petitioner under the 1962 Rules shall not be cancelled under Rule 12 of the 1980 Rules and the impugned show cause notice dated 3.2.89 issued pursuant to the impugned order are without jurisdiction and are liable to be quashed. 6. In the result, the impugned order dated 3.2.89 and the impugned show cause notice dated 3.2.89 of the Sub Divisional Officer, Amarpur, South Tripura are quashed and the writ petition is allowed. But in the circumstances, there shall be no order as to cost.