2002 (12) TMI 599 - SC - Indian Laws

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Applicability of Section 170-B of the M.P. Land Revenue Code to transactions between aboriginal tribals.
2. Interpretation of legislative intent behind Section 170-B.
3. Validity of the show cause notice issued by the Sub-Divisional Officer.

Summary:

1. Applicability of Section 170-B of the M.P. Land Revenue Code to transactions between aboriginal tribals:
The appellant contended that Section 170-B of the M.P. Land Revenue Code does not apply to transactions between aboriginal tribals. The appellant argued that the provision is intended to address fraudulent transactions between aboriginal tribals and non-tribals. However, the Court held that the language of Section 170-B is clear and unambiguous, covering all transactions of transfer, including those between aboriginal tribals. The Court emphasized that the Legislature did not exclude transactions between aboriginal tribals from the purview of Section 170-B.

2. Interpretation of legislative intent behind Section 170-B:
The appellant relied on the statement of objects and reasons and sub-Section (2-A) to argue that Section 170-B is meant to address transactions between aboriginal tribals and non-tribals. The Court, however, clarified that the legislative intent behind Section 170-B is to protect aboriginal tribals from being defrauded of their legitimate rights, irrespective of whether the transferee is an aboriginal tribal or not. The Court noted that sub-Section (2-A), enacted in 1998, has a limited scope and does not alter the broad applicability of Section 170-B as enacted in 1980.

3. Validity of the show cause notice issued by the Sub-Divisional Officer:
The appellant challenged the show cause notice issued by the Sub-Divisional Officer, arguing it was without jurisdiction. The Court held that the notice was valid and within the jurisdiction of the Sub-Divisional Officer. The appellant should have participated in the enquiry instead of prematurely filing a writ petition. The High Court's decision to dismiss the writ petition was upheld.

Conclusion:
The appeal was dismissed as devoid of merit, and the Court affirmed the applicability of Section 170-B to all transactions involving aboriginal tribals, emphasizing the legislative intent to protect their rights. The show cause notice issued by the Sub-Divisional Officer was deemed valid, and the appellant's writ petition was rightly rejected by the High Court.