[Uttarakhand Zamindari Abolition Act] Prior Sanction Mandatory For Transferring Land To Society For Non-Agricultural Purposes: High Court
The Uttarakhand High Court has held that prior sanction of the State Government is mandatory for transfer of land in favour of a society for non-agricultural purposes under Section 154 of the Uttar Pradesh Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950, as applicable to Uttarakhand, even when the transfer is effected through a gift deed. The Court observed that the statutory restrictions...
The Uttarakhand High Court has held that prior sanction of the State Government is mandatory for transfer of land in favour of a society for non-agricultural purposes under Section 154 of the Uttar Pradesh Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950, as applicable to Uttarakhand, even when the transfer is effected through a gift deed. The Court observed that the statutory restrictions under Section 154 are not confined to transfers by sale and extend to all recognized modes of transfer, including gift.
Justice Pankaj Purohit was hearing a writ petition filed by Shishya Society seeking a direction to the authorities to register a Gift Deed dated 17 July 2018, executed in its favour by another society in respect of land measuring 300 square meters. The petitioner contended that despite completion of registration formalities and deposit of registration fees, the Sub-Registrar neither registered the document nor passed any formal order refusing registration. It was argued that Section 154 of the Act would not apply since the transaction was a gift and not a sale. The State opposed the petition, contending that the transaction, though styled as a gift, was nevertheless a transfer of immovable property governed by Section 154 of the Act.
The Court examined the scheme of Section 154 of the Act along with Sections 5 and 122 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882. It observed that Section 122 specifically defines a gift as a “transfer” of property and that Section 154(1) expressly uses the words “sale or gift,” thereby making it clear that the statutory embargo applies to both modes of transfer. The Court held that Section 154 constitutes a composite regulatory framework governing transfers of land and cannot be interpreted narrowly to exclude gift transactions merely because certain sub-clauses use the expression “purchase.”
“… when the Act regulates 'transfer' of land and expressly includes gift under sub-section (1), the regulatory mechanism under Section 154 cannot be rendered inapplicable merely because a particular sub-clause uses the expression “purchase,” the Court observed.
The Court held that the exemption permitting acquisition of land up to 250 square meters without permission applies only to individuals for residential purposes and not to institutional bodies such as societies.
The Court further noted that the Act is a piece of socio-economic legislation intended to regulate land holdings and prevent circumvention of statutory restrictions, and acceptance of the petitioner's interpretation would enable a party to bypass restrictions imposed upon sale by resorting to a gift, thereby rendering the statutory control superfluous.
On the conduct of the Sub-Registrar, the Court observed that the authority had acted contrary to the statutory scheme by neither registering the document nor formally refusing registration and by failing to refer the matter to the competent authority under Section 154(5)(a) and (b) of the Act. However, the Court held that such procedural lapse did not confer any right upon the petitioner to seek a mandamus directing registration of the document.
Accordingly, the Court dismissed the writ petition while directing the Sub-Registrar to proceed in accordance with Section 154(5)(a) and (b) of the Act and refer the matter to the Collector for appropriate action.
Case Title: Shishya Society, Atak Farm v. State of Uttarakhand & Ors. [Writ Petition Misc. Single No. 1722 of 2020]