9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (5) TMI 1082X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2008 With SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 14079 of 2008 With SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 14085 of 2008 With SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 14144 of 2008 With SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 14275 of 2008 With SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 14300 of 2008 With SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 14520 of 2008 With SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 15811 of 2008 With SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 15814 of 2008 With SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 1283 of 2009 With SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 1286 of 2009 With SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 1296 of 2009 With SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 14411 of 2008 With SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 11634 of 2008 With SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 11373 of 2009 With SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 12179 of 2008 With SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 10552 of 2008 With SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 10555 of 2008 With SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 10831 of 2008 With SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 10832 of 2008 With SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 10857 of 2008 With SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 11240 of 2008 With SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 11457 of 2008 With SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 11566 of 2008 With SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 11567 of 2008 With CIVIL APPLICATION ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... GOVERNMENT PLEADER with MS SANGEETA VISHEN, AGP FOR THE RESPONDENT COMMON CAV JUDGMENT (Per : HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. S.J. MUKHOPADHAYA) The matter relates to payment of premium of land to new and indivisible tenure and restricted tenure for transferring or change of purpose for transferring from new tenure to old tenure land i.e. agriculture purpose to non-agriculture purpose. The petitioners having challenged either the validity of Section 43 of the Bombay Tenancy Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 [hereinafter referred to as the Tenancy Act ] and/or the resolution dated 4.7.2008 issued by the State Government for giving effect to Section 43 and/or the rate of jantri i.e the minimum valuation of the land of one or the other areas, they were heard together and decided by this common judgment. 2. At this stage, it may be mentioned that though a number of writ petitions were heard together, but the argument was mainly advanced by 5 to 6 senior counsel, rest of the counsel adopted the same and some of them filed written submissions highlighting the merits of their individual case. While deliberating our judgment, common arguments as highlighted and advanced ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lturists' Loan Act, 1884, or the Bombay Non-agriculturists' Loans Act, 1928, as in force in the State of Gujarat, or in favour of a bank or co-operative society, and without prejudice to any other remedy open to the State Government, bank or co-operative society, as the case may be, in the event of his making default in payment of such loan in accordance with the terms on which such loan was granted, it shall be lawful for the State Government, bank or co-operative society, as the case may be, to cause his interest in the land to be attached and sold and the proceeds to be applied in payment of such loan. Explanation, - For the purposes of this sub-section, bank means - (a) the State Bank of India constituted under the State Bank of India Act, 1955; (b) any subsidiary bank as defined in clause (k) of section 2 of the State Bank of India (Subsidiary Banks) Act, 1959; (c) any corresponding new bank as defined in clause (d) of section 2 of the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1970; (d) the Agricultural Refinance and Development Corporation, established under the Agricultural Refinance and Development Corporation Act, 1963. ( ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nant under Section 32 was transferable, if so permitted by the District Collector. Original Section 43 did not contain any provision for payment of any amount like premium to anybody in the eventuality of the land being transferred. It was contended that the petitioners do not challenge the constitutional validity of the provisions regarding control and regulation for transfer of occupancy conferred under Section 32 of the Tenancy Act. The challenge is only in respect of the part of the provision, which provides for payment of amount to the State Government whereby the occupancy which did not carry any burden of payment of any amount to the State Government on 1.4.1957 is materially altered by imposing restrictions regarding payment of amount to the Government initially by Amendment Act No. XVI of 1960 and further by Amendment Act No. XXX of 1977 whereby the phraseology of Section 43 is further amended by adding the word consideration , which did not occur in Section 43 after the amendment made by Act No. XVI of 1960. In view of the settled legal position, the Act was validly enacted with reference to the constitutional provisions of Article 19(1)(f) as was in operation at the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2 SCC 104, etc. (iv) The challenge to the constitutional validity has been made on the ground of excessive delegation of essential legislative powers. According to the petitioners, in view of the scheme of the Constitution, the legislative powers are conferred on the respective State legislation as well as the Parliament. It is the function and privilege of the legislature to legislate on the subjects incorporated in the entries in the 7th Schedule to the Constitution of India. In absence of any methodology provided under Section 43 for determination of the amount and parameters to exercise powers to determine the amount, either under Section 43 or under the Tenancy Act, Section 43 amounts to excessive delegation of essential legislative powers and, thereby, violative of Article 14 of the Constitution. Reliance was placed on the following Supreme Court decisions :- (a) Krishna Mohan (P) Ltd. vs. MCD, (2003) 7 SCC 151 (b) Bhatnagars Co. Ltd. vs. Union of India, AIR 1957 SC 478 (c) Hamdard Dawakhana vs. Union of India, AIR 1960 SC 554 (d) MP High Court Bar Association vs. Union of India, AIR 2005 SC 4114 (v) Section 43 is violative of Article 14 and Article 300A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e State Government on the basis of the letter dated 31.3.2008 of the Revenue Department and circular dated 31.3.2008 of the Superintendent of Stamps, adopted common formula by the impugned resolution dated 4.7.2008. Thus, it was issued with a view to bring simplification in the method of transferring the land of new and indivisible tenure i.e. restricted tenure to old tenure i.e. from agriculture purpose to nonagriculture purpose. The relevant portion of the English version, as submitted by the petitioners, is quoted hereunder :- Regarding bringing simplification in the procedure of converting the land of new of tenure under new and impartible tenure and under the restricted tenure of Tenancy Act in to old tenure for the agricultural or Non-agricultural purpose. Government Of Gujarat Revenue Department Resolution No. NSJ-102006-571-J( Part-2) Sachivalaya Gandhinagar. Dated 04/07/2008 Preamble:- The prior permission of the Collector shall be required to be obtained after making payment of the consideration prescribed by the State Government, by issuing special or general order for transferring any land purchased by the tenants, under Sections- 17-kh, 32, 3 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... shall be maintained. Thus, it was under consideration of the Government to bring simplification by applying the procedure of valuation based on jantri by making change in existing valuation procedure and by putting into force one resolution in this regard instead of different resolutions. -:: R E S O L U T I ON ::- On the basis of the letter No.STP/102008/174/H.1 dated 31/03/2008 of the Revenue Department, for the purpose of Stamp duty , a new Jantri has been put into force by issuing the Circular No. Stamp/ Technical/ 07/08/1512 dated 31/03/2008 with effect from 01/04/2008 by the Superintendent of Stamps, Gandhinagar. After studying and careful consideration, the Government has held that the valuation of the land of new and impartible tenure and of restricted tenure type of Tenancy Act is to be done as per the rate of Jantri (as per Annual Statements of rates-2006 and as per the amendments made from time time). By consolidating all resolutions/circulars existing instructions in respect of valuation, it has been decided to follow the following procedure . 1. The new policy of the rates of premium for converting and transfer/ for change of purpose of land of new and i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er at which Type of tenure 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 From Agriculture to the purpose of agricultural old tenure Rural Area After 15 years Zero It shall be transferred for the purpose of agricultural at old tenure, but premium is liable to be paid for non-agricultural purpose 2 From Agriculture to the purpose of agricultural old tenure Urban Area After 15 years 20 (twenty) times amount of assessment. It shall be transferred for the purpose of agricultural at old tenure, but premium is liable to be paid for non-agricultural purpose 3 For Non-agricultural purpose The urban and rural areas After 15 years 50 % The land shall considered under old tenure after sale/transfer or change of purpose 2. The procedure of converting the land of new tenure into old tenure for the purpose of agricultura ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nverting the land of new tenure including Tenancy Act in to old tenure for agricultural purpose or the mutation in that regard, the competent authorities shall have to conduct the revision proceedings as per the standing instructions issued by the Government. (H) The above mentioned procedure shall have to be reviewed in the meeting of Revenue officers held by the Collector every month. (I) In the case of breach of tenure, for this purpose , 15(fifteen) years shall have to be reckoned from the date of order of regnant issued lastly. 3. Procedure of converting from New Tenure to Old Tenure for Non-agriculture purpose. (A) On receipt of application in prescribed form as per Appendix -I by Collector, application shall have to be forwarded to Mamlatdar office within 7 days (Seven) for scrutiny as per check list. On receipt of such application after scrutiny, Mamlatdar shall have to submit the report to Prant officer within 20 (twenty) days after making all types of scrutiny and site inspection and the Prant officer shall have to forward the report to Collector after verification within 10 days. (B) After receiving report of Mamlatdar through Prant Officer, after verifyi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of more than ₹ 50/- lacs to Government, the chapters regarding valuation of more than ₹ 1 crore shall have to be forwarded to Government for prior permission. (C) As per above 4(B), the permission shall have to be granted by making verification of record at department level entirely in respect of the chapter received by the department and by obtaining the consent of the government 5. Regarding considering rates of Jantri: (A) When sale is required to be made from agriculture to agriculture purpose, the valuation shall be made by considering rate of agriculture Jantri prevailing in Urban and Rular area. (B) In rural area, when the land is used for non-agriculture purpose, valuation shall be made by considering rates of Jantri for that purpose. (c) In Urban area, for non-agriculture purpose, valuation shall be made after considering rates of Jantri of developed land. (d) When non-agriculture use is made for educational, social, charity or other purpose, then valuation shall be made in Rural area, by considering rate of Jantri for residential purpose and in Urban area, by considering rate of Jantri of the developed land. (e) The Collector shall have t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed. (h) In the chapters remained pending at the district and the state level also, in all cases wherein the permission order is required to be issued after 1-04-2008 also, the orders shall have to be issued by deciding the premium as per Jantri. 7. In the cases of land allotted under gifting of land ( bhoodan) and under The Gujarat Agriculture Land Ceiling Act, 1960, any provision of this resolution shall not be applied. 8. On implementation of the aforesaid procedure, the resolutions/circulars mentioned in appendix-3 in toto and the resolutions/circulars mentioned in appendix-4 partly are superseded only for the part in mentioned in column -4 of the Appendix-4. In this manner, on account of superseding the resolution entirely or partly, the orders issued before 01/04/2008 shall not be affected under the provisions/ instructions of these resolutions / circulars. 9. On the basis of the policy framed vide resolution dtd. 20/12/2006 of the department for bringing in force the procedure of valuation based on new Jantri with effect from dtd. 01/04/2008, this issue with the concurrence of finance department vide their note dtd. 15/05/2008 and 27/06/2008 on this department ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Collector. The transferability of the land is assessed at 80% and the rest of the occupancy rights are assessed at 20%. This phenomenon is absolutely arbitrary, discriminatory and it is oppressive. Indirectly the State by the impugned resolution acquired 80% of the right, title and interest in the land without payment of any compensation to anybody. Therefore, the resolution is arbitrary and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. (iv) The Tenancy Act does not provide for recovery of the amount on every transfer of land. Thus, on transfer of land for agricultural purpose after the payment of premium of 50% of the market price, the new purchaser purchases the land and he becomes the owner and occupier in pursuance of the sale deed and, therefore, the land ceases to be a land for the new purchaser under Section 43 of the Tenancy Act. Therefore, once the permission for transfer is granted and once the premium amount is received by the State, it cannot continue to recover further premium again and again on every occasion of transfer of land. If the interpretation, as the State intends to make, is accepted, then it will amount to paying premium of 50% of the market ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ny basis, unreasonable, arbitrary, unfair and thereby violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. EFFECT OF RESOLUTION DATED 4.7.2008 RETROSPECTIVE OR PROSPECTIVE 10. In some cases, the petitioners have raised the question of giving effect to the resolution dated 4.7.2008 from retrospective date. They submitted as follows :- (i) The resolution dated 4.7.2008 inasmuch as it provides for decision in pending cases on the basis of the said resolution is bad being without authority as the State Government cannot give retrospective effect to its resolution; no such power has been delegated by the legislature in favour of the State Government. The impugned resolution can operate only prospectively and not retrospectively. Reliance was placed on the Supreme Court decision in the case of Orient Paper Mills vs. Union of India, reported in AIR 1970 SC 1498. (ii) In many cases, it has been pleaded that they have already made agreement with the purchasers, made applications for transfer of land in favour of others and/or for transfer from new tenure to old tenure i.e. from agriculture to non-agriculture purpose, determination has already been made by the District leve ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on which confers power on the Custodian to cancel a lease in unqualified and absolute and could not be abridged by reference to the non obstante clause which was only inserted ex abundanti cautela with a view to repel a possible contention that the section does not by implication repeal statutes conferring rights on lessees. And in Bhikoba Shankar Dhumal vs. Mohan Lal Punchand Tathed, this Court hed : (SCC p.690, para 17) It appears to us that the said paragraph was introduced by way of abundant caution to get over the possible objection raised on the basis of the decision in the case of Dadarao Kashiram vs. State of Maharashtra. The said paragraph is merely declaratory of what the true legal position had always been even from the commencement of the Act. The introduction of an express provision to the above effect does not have the effect of altering the true legal position as explained by us above even without the aid of such express opinion. This becomes further clear from the observations found in the decision of this Court in Raghunath Laxman Wani vs. State of Maharashtra. 12. The learned Advocate General would contend that the Tenancy Act, 1948, the Gujarat (Amendm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is promulgated to regulate and impose restriction on the transfer of agricultural land. 14. So far as the resolution dated 4.7.2008 is concerned, the learned Advocate General submitted that if the legislative policy is sufficiently clear and the guidelines could be gathered from the preamble, objects and reasons and other provisions of the Act and the Rules, such guidelines cannot be alleged to be bad on the ground of unbridled or uncanalised power. In fact, the exercise of power if delegated under the guideline is contrary to the policy as envisaged, it would be gathered from the preamble, objects and reasons and other provisions of the Act. He placed reliance on different Supreme Court decisions, which we will discuss at the appropriate stage. 15. As far as the challenge against the jantri is concerned, the learned Advocate General would contend that none of the petitions has contained an independent and substantial challenge against the jantri dated 1.4.2008 and that, therefore, mere challenge against the jantri price in some individual cases and that too, without any substantive reasons, cannot and should not be entertained in a petition where several issues have been in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed in the Supreme Court, during pendency of the said case, the 1st Amendment Act, 1951 was passed amending the Constitution of India by inserting Articles 31-A, 31-B and Schedule IX in the Constitution. The constitutional validity of the said amendments came to be upheld by the Supreme Court on 5.10.1951 in the case of Shankri Prasad vs. Union of India, reported in AIR 1951 SC 458. It was as a result of the aforesaid 1st Amendment Act of 1951 that the Supreme Court in the appeal in the case of State of Bihar vs. Kameshwar Singh, reported in AIR 1952 SC 252, held that the Bihar Act has got immunity under the aforesaid constitutional provisions and hence, the same was valid and constitutional. 20. So far as the constitutionality of Section 43 of the Tenancy Act, 1948 is concerned, it will be evident that the same is a step towards a major agrarian reform and one of the main objectives thereof is to regulate and impose restrictions on the transfer of agricultural lands, etc. belonging to or occupied by agriculturists, etc. in the erstwhile Province of Bombay. This aspect will be evident from the second paragraphs of the preamble of the Act, which is set out hereunder :- AND WHE ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fore, protected from attack against its constitutionality on the score of its having violated the fundamental rights enshrined under Articles 14, 19 and 31 of the Constitution. 23. Section 43 of the Tenancy Act came to be further amended by virtue of the Gujarat (Amendment) Act No. XVI of 1960 wherein after the words previous sanction of the Collector , condition relating to payment of such amount as the State Government may by general or special order determine , came to be introduced. Section 43 as it stood by virtue of the said Act No. XVI of 1960, read as under :- 43.(1) No land purchased by a tenant under section 32, 32F, 32-I, 32-O or 32-U or sold to any person under section 32P or 64 shall be transferred by sale, gift, exchange, mortgage, lease or assignment or partition without previous sanction of the Collector and except on payment of such amount as the State Government may by general or special order determine. (2) Any transfer of land in contravention of sub-section (1) shall be invalid. The validity of Section 43 as made by Act No. XVI of 1960 was challenged on the alleged ground that it does not lay down any guidelines for the executives in the matter ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n the case of Patel Ambalal Gokalbhai vs. State of Gujarat, reported in (1982) 3 SCC 316. In the said case, the Supreme Court held that the Gujarat (Amendment) Act No. XVI of 1960 is covered by the protective umbrella of 9th Schedule at its Entry No. 40 and that, therefore, the constitutionality thereto is immuned from challenge. 25. By insertion of the Amendment Act No. XXX of 19777, Section 43 is amended whereby amongst other things, the words in consideration of payment of such amount ... came to be substituted in place of the words on payment of such amount ... . The amended Section 43 which holds the presently field reads as under :- 43.(1) No land or any interest therein purchased by a tenant under section 17B, 32, 32F, 32-I, 32-O, 32-U, 43-1D or 88EE or sold to any person under section 32P or 64 shall be transferred or shall be agreed by an instrument in writing to be transferred, by sale, gift, exchange, mortgage, lease or assignment, without the previous sanction of the Collector and except in consideration of payment of such amount as the State Government may by general or special order determine; and no such land or any interest, therein shall be partitioned wi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... interest therein, etc. shall be valid in favour of a person who is not an agriculturist ... (e) Explanation to sub-section (5) of Section 84C : For the purposes of this section 'new and impartible tenure' means the tenure of occupancy which is non-transferable and non-partible without the previous sanction of the Collector. The aforesaid preamble and the provisions are the sufficient guidelines suggesting that any amount which the State Government is to fix as a condition precedent to the grant of sanction, has obviously to be in terrorem so as to discourage such transfer, assignment, etc. of the agricultural land by tenant, who was made a deemed purchaser i.e. the owner of the land, which he was cultivating on the stipulated day. Thus, we find that there is sufficient guideline as regards philosophy on which the Act is based. Section 43 thereby cannot be considered to be bad and ultra vires on the ground that it does not lay down any guideline for fixing of premium amount. The judgments relied upon on behalf of the petitioners with reference to different State legislations do not apply in the present case. 28. In the case of Vasanlal M. Sanjanwala vs. State o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mount of the tax which no doubt has to be below the maximum, is to be fixed. Provision for such maximum only sets out a limit of the rate to be imposed and a limit is only a limit and not a guidance. 30. One can gather from the preamble, objects and reasons and the other provisions of the Act where legislative policy has laid down suitable guidelines or has not delegated such power giving rise to unbridled or uncanalized power has been discussed by the Supreme Court in the case of Consumer Act Group vs. State of Tamil Nadu, reported in (2000) 7 SCC 425 wherein the Court held :- 18. The catena of decisions referred to above concludes unwaveringly in spite of a very wide power bring conferred on the delegatee that such a section would still not be ultra vires, if guidelines could be gathered from the Preamble, Objections and Reasons and other provisions of the Acts and Rules. In testing the validity of such provision, the courts have to discover, whether there is any legislative policy, purpose of the statute or indication of any clear will through its various provisions. If there be any, then this by itself would be a guiding factor to be exercised by the delegatee. In other ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l right, provisions being made that no person shall be deprived of his property save in accordance with law. In the present case, the tenant who became a deemed purchaser, then owner, in view of the Tenancy Act, nobody is going to deprive of his property. In fact, as now development is taking place in and around the area, therefore the tenants who have now become owners of the property, they want to change the tenure from new tenure to old tenure, i.e. from agricultural to non-agricultural land. This they want for their benefit. Similarly if the restricted tenure (new tenure) is taken out, they may transfer their property to get much more what they spent taking advantage of agrarian reforms under Section 32 of the Tenancy Act. When a development is made, the owner of the property may get much more than what he would have got, if the same remained undeveloped in the process, but also get the benefit of living in a developed town having good town planning. Such was the observation of the Supreme Court in the case of State of Gujarat vs. Shantilal Mangaldas, reported in (1969) 1 SCC 509. 35. Section 43 of the Tenancy Act, where restriction has been put by asking to pay premium i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... muned from challenge. 38. So far as the resolution dated 4.7.2008 is concerned, from its preamble it will be evident that the earlier procedure to assess the price of the land through the District level committee or State level committee at different stages used to consume much time, in absence of any time limit fixed for assessing the price. Considering the aforesaid aspect and the State Government s policy to make easy implementation of the transfer of land from new tenure to old tenure i.e. agriculture to non-agriculture, it was decided to accept approach valuation as made by resolution No. NSHJ/102006/517/J dated 20.12.2006 i.e. jantri. Pursuant to the letter dated 31.3.2008 of the Revenue Department which relates to stamp duty, the jantri was given effect from 1.4.2008. It has not been accepted in toto, will be evident from the impugned resolution dated 4.7.2008. For example, for transfer of land from agriculture to old tenure in rural areas after 15 years, the rate of premium has been fixed at zero . However, such rate for transfer from agriculture to old tenure in urban areas after 15 years, the rate has been fixed at 50%. For transfer from agriculture to non-agricult ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ific in nature, do not provide any mechanism to oppose the valuation. The respondent State in its affidavit at para 9 filed in Special Civil Application No. 10832 of 2008, has stated as under :- 9. It is submitted that so far as the new Jantry (Annual Statement of Rates-2007) is concerned. The same is decided after scrupulously followed all the procedure and also considered the objection raised by the concerned person. It is submitted that the authority has also taken assistance/guidance of technical agency. It is submitted that before finalizing the new Jantry, the State Authority had undertaken sitewise survey and lso considered the sale transactions of last 3 years as well as considered the market value fixed by the District Level Valuation Committee and State Land Valuation Committee. It is submitted that initially the authority has prepared draft Jantry and the same was published in local daily and the authority has invited objections/suggestions from the affected persons. It is submitted that in view of the advertisement published by the authority, the authority has received more than 4,000 objections and the authority has appointed expert committee to consider such ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was no latches on their part, but there was latches on the part of the State authorities or the District level committee or the State level committee. In some of the cases, it is stated that the District level committee or the State level committee has already determined the premium, but the Collector has not granted permission. Therefore, according to them, the crucial date for determination of the premium should be the date of application. In this connection, we may only observe that under Section 43, there is a restriction on transfer of land purchased or sold under the said Act. No land or any interest therein purchased by a tenant under Sections 17B, 32, 32F, 32-I, 32-O, 32-U, 43-ID or 88EE can be transferred by any tenant, owner, by sale, gift, mortgage, lease or assignment without the previous sanction of the Collector. In each case, it is to be seen as to the place where such land is situated i.e. in the urban area or in the rural area. If it is in the urban area, then it is to be ascertained whether the land falls within the municipal area or the area under the Urban Development Authority or Mahanagarpalika or notified area or cantonment area. Collection of all such facts ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
