MADHUKAR SADBHA SHIVARKAR (D) BY LRS. Vs STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.
Bench: V. GOPALA GOWDA,C. NAGAPPAN
Case number: C.A. No.-001751-001751 / 2015
Diary number: 10727 / 2007
Advocates: V. K. SIDHARTHAN Vs
V. N. RAGHUPATHY
Page 1
1
NON REPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 1751 OF 2015
(Arising out of SLP (C) No. 9710 of 2007)
MADHUKAR SADBHA SHIVARKAR (D) BY LRS. …APPELLANTS Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS. … RESPONDENTS
WITH CIVIL APPEAL NO. 1752 OF 2015
(Arising out of SLP (C) No. 9816 of 2007) SUVARNA VIJAYRAO RASKAR ………APPELLANT Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS. …. RESPONDENTS
WITH CIVIL APPEAL NO. 1753 OF 2015
(Arising out of SLP (C) No. 11179 of 2007) RAJANIBAI MADHUKAR SAPKAL ………APPELLANT Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS. …. RESPONDENTS
AND CIVIL APPEAL NO. 1754 OF 2015
(Arising out of SLP (C) No. 12473 of 2007) SUVARNA VIJAYRAO RASKAR & ORS ………APPELLANTS Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS. …. RESPONDENTS
Page 2
2
J U D G M E N T V.GOPALA GOWDA, J.
Leave granted in all the special leave petitions.
2. Aggrieved by the common judgment and order dated
22.12.2006 passed by the High Court of Judicature at
Bombay in various Writ Petitions, the appellants have
filed these appeals by questioning the correctness of the
same by raising certain questions of law and urging
various grounds in support of the same and requested this
Court for setting aside the same and issue writ of
certiorari to quash the orders dated 21.10.1986,
23.06.1988, 7.8.1989 and 31.10.1989 passed by the State
Government in exercise of its power under Section 14(4)
of the Maharashtra Agricultural Lands (Ceiling on
Holdings) Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) appointing the
Sub Divisional Officer, Pandharpur as Enquiry Officer to
hold enquiry in respect of the land holders whose names
are mentioned against the land held by them in the said
orders. As per the affidavit filed by Shri Shankar
Narayan, the Assistant Collector, Pandharpur, by an order
dated 27.9.1991, the Government had modified original
Page 3
3
orders dated 7.8.1989 and 31.10.1989 and in supersession
of those orders, the Government has designated the
Assistant Commissioner of Land Records, Pune as Enquiry
Officer which was subsequently designated the Deputy
Commissioner of Pune Division as the Enquiry Officer.
3. For the sake of brevity, the relevant brief resume of
facts and legal contentions urged on behalf of the
parties in C.A. @ SLP(c) No. 9710 of 2007 are stated in
this judgment with a view to find out as to whether this
Court is required to exercise its appellate jurisdiction
under Article 136 of the Constitution of India to
interfere with the impugned judgment and order of the
High Court and the orders passed by the Maharashtra State
Government impugned in the writ petitions.
The Saswad Mali Sugar Factory Ltd., Malinagar,
District Solapur is a Company registered some time in
the year 1932-1933 under the provisions of the Indian
Companies Act 1956. The Company purchased 1500-1600 acres
of perennially irrigated land at Akluj, Bijwadi, Tambave
and Mahalung Villages in Malshiras Taluka. During the
said period, the Company took 5000 acres of land on lease
Page 4
4
from the various land owners in the said villages and
thereafter, created sub-leases in favour of its share
holders. 125 sub-leases were created and land was
allotted to shareholders by the Company between 50-500
acres in favour of each one of the share holders and such
holdings of land continued till 26.01.1962, when the said
Act came into force. As per the provisions of the Act,
an individual was only allowed to hold 18 acres of
irrigated land. The cut-off date for determining land
holding under the Act was 04.08.1959. It is the case of the State Government that the share holders of the
Company fearing loss of their land holdings in collusion
with the revenue authorities manipulated the revenue
records of the land involved in the proceedings with a
mala fide intention to show that besides the holdings of
land by the Company, there were 384 sub-leases of the
land altogether. It is its further case that
lavanchitthis for the period 1959-1960 to 1961-1962 were
destroyed and false revenue records were created to
substantiate the holding of 384 sub-leases in respect of
the land which was in the name of the Company.
4. In the year 1964, the original landowners from whom
Page 5
5
land was taken by the Company realized the fraud played by
the Company and its share holders upon the Revenue
authorities of the Act and filed a complaint with the Anti
Corruption Bureau (ACB) challenging the manipulation of
revenue records by the Company of its shares in collusion
with the Revenue Officers to investigate into the
fabricated records.
After the aforesaid Act came into force, the land
ceiling proceedings of the land holdings of the share
holders of the Company and the alleged sub-lessees took
place and it was held by the Tahsildar under the Act, that
everybody held the land within the ceiling limit and the
said decision was appealed and attained finality in the
year 1977, as the appeals filed against the orders passed
in the land appeals were also dismissed.
5. In the year 1974, the ACB obtained permission from the
Maharashtra State Government to investigate into the
alleged offences punishable under Sections 466, 468, 471,
477A, 120B and 109 of the IPC, which were registered
after investigation of the case by the said Bureau against
the share holders of the Company and others. The said
Page 6
6
criminal cases were tried by the Special Judge, Solapur
against the accused persons in special case Nos. 2, 5 to 7
of 1975. The accused persons, namely, the share holders
were convicted for different offences and accordingly,
sentenced them to undergo imprisonment for the period
mentioned in the judgment and order of the Special Judge.
Aggrieved by the aforesaid judgment and order of the
Special Judge, the accused persons preferred criminal
appeals before the High Court which passed judgments and
orders dated 6.2.1985, 2.4.1985, 20.4.1985 and 23.4.1985
respectively dismissing the said appeals. The accused
persons preferred special leave petitions before this
Court which were also dismissed in the year 1985.
6. The State Government forwarded the aforesaid judgment
and order of the Special Judge in criminal cases to the
District Collector asking him to conduct enquiry and
determine the surplus land involved in the cases. In view
of the aforesaid conviction and the order of sentence
passed by the Special Judge and confirmed by the High
Court and this Court, the State Government in exercise of
its power under Section 14(4) of the Act vide order dated
27.9.1991 designated the Asstt. Commissioner, Pune
Page 7
7
Division as Enquiry Officer to make an enquiry pertaining
to the list of bogus land holders.
7. Some of the appellants in the connected appeals who
are purchasers of the land from the Company’s share
holders who were accused and persons who were acquitted in
the criminal case, and some of the appellants who were
not the accused in the criminal case, had also filed the
writ petitions before the High Court questioning the
correctness of the order passed by the State Government
under the aforesaid provisions of the Act appointing the
Enquiry Officer to conduct enquiry pertaining to the list
of bogus land holders mentioned in the impugned order.
8. It is urged by Mr. Kapil Sibal, Mr. Aryama Sundaram
and Dr. Abhishek Manu Singhvi, that it is not open for the
State Government to appoint an Enquiry Officer in exercise
of its power under Section 14(4) of the Act, with a
direction to him to reopen the cases in relation to the
holdings of land of the Company share holders and its sub-
leases after 12 years of the proceedings in the ceiling
matters under the Act were concluded on merit and the same
attained finality. It is further urged by them that the
Page 8
8
State Government could not have suo motu exercised its
power beyond the period of three years limitation
prescribed under Section 45(2) of the Act to reopen the
cases and revise the orders passed in the ceiling matters,
which proceedings have attained finality. The orders
passed in the appeals in the ceiling proceedings have
attained finality, the State Government could not have
exercised its suo-motu power to call for the records
pertaining to the land holdings of the appellants as the
period of three years limitation stipulated in the above
provision was over from the date of the orders passed
under Section 21 by the Tehsildar who was the Revenue
Officer in the land ceiling matters and those orders have
attained finality. Therefore, it is urged that the
exercise of power by the State Government under Section
14(4) of the Act, appointing an Enquiry Officer to
enquire into the land holdings of the Company share
holders and sub-leases on the alleged ground that the
share holders have created sub-leases in respect of their
holdings of land by fabricating the revenue records
against whom criminal cases were registered and were
convicted and sentenced them for the charges by the
Page 9
9
Special Judge and in which proceedings, the Company and
the share holders who are not the parties and other
appellants in respect of civil appeals, who were
subsequent purchasers of the land from the share holders,
and they have acquired constitutional right upon their
land holdings under Article 300A of the Constitution of
India and therefore, it is totally impermissible in law
for the State Government to pass the impugned order as the
same is without jurisdiction for the reason that Section
45 (2) of the Act, only confers power upon it to exercise
its suo motu revisional power within three years from the
date of passing of the orders in the land ceiling cases
and orders passed in the appeals and call for the records
in the revisional proceedings to examine the proprietory
of such orders passed in the land ceiling proceedings of
the land under Section 21 of the Act on the declaration
made by the holders of the land under Section 6 of the
Act, declaring that the declarants do not own the surplus
lands under the Act, which orders were the subject matter
of appeals at the instance of the State Government and its
officers before the appellate authority and the same came
to be dismissed on merits by the appellate authority after
Page 10
10
hearing them and the said judgments and orders have
attained finality and the State Government has not chosen
to exercise its suo motu revisional power under Section
45(2) of the Act within the stipulated period of three
years. It is further urged by the learned senior counsel
that the State Government has no statutory power either
under Section 45(2) or under Section 14(4) of the Act to
enquire into the very same subject-matter of the land
holdings of the share holders, sub-lessees and the
purchasers of the land under the guise of exercise of its
statutory power under the provisions of the Act, by
appointing an officer to conduct enquiry in relation to
the land in question with reference to the revenue records
of the land of the villages referred to supra.
9. The learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the
appellants have also further contended that the order
passed by the State Government is without jurisdiction and
the same is passed without giving an opportunity to the
appellants, which is not only in violation of statutory
provisions of the Act, but also principles of natural
justice as its action entails serious civil consequences
upon the rights accrued in favour of the appellants of the
Page 11
11
land in question. Further, it is urged by them that the
said orders are arbitrary, unreasonable and violative of
the Fundamental Rights guaranteed to the appellants under
Articles 14, 19 and 21 and also the constitutional right
under Article 300A of the Constitution of India in
relation to the land holdings. The learned Division Bench
of the High Court ought to have accepted the legal
contentions urged before it in exercise of its
extraordinary writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India and the impugned order should have
been quashed as prayed by them but, on the other hand, it
dismissed the writ petitions by passing the common
judgment and order which is under challenge in these
appeals, which are required to be interfered with by this
Court in exercise of its appellate jurisdiction under
Article 136 of the Constitution of India as there will be
miscarriage of justice, if the impugned common judgment
and order is not set aside and quash the order passed by
the State Government. Therefore, the learned senior
counsel on behalf of the appellants requested this Court
to allow the appeals and set aside the impugned judgment
and order and quash the government order impugned in the
Page 12
12
writ petitions by allowing these appeals.
10. The learned senior counsel Mr. Shekhar Naphade
appearing on behalf of the private respondents/land owners
at whose instance the criminal cases were registered
against the accused persons on their representation, the
State Government has passed the impugned order. He has
submitted that the Company has taken nearly about 5000
acres of the land from its owners and purchased 1500 acres
of land in different villages in Maharashtra State viz.
Akluj, Bijwadi, Tambave and Mahlung in Malshiras Taluka
and that land has been wrongfully retained by the Company,
share holders and the so called sub lessees by giving
false declarations under the provisions of the Act on the
basis of the fabricated land revenue record in relation to
the land involved in these cases.
11. He further submits that as per the provisions of the
Land Ceiling Act, the ceiling limit of holding of land by
one person is 18 acres of agricultural wet land. The
undisputed fact is that the land holding tenants were 125
as on the date when the Act came into force. The same has
been illegally increased to 384 sub-leases to circumvent
Page 13
13
the provisions of the Act by playing fraud on the
competent revenue authorities by the declarants by
fabricating and creating land revenue records of the land
in collusion with the Revenue Officers contrary to the
provisions of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966,
with a view to make wrongful gains of the land holdings by
themselves. Criminal cases were registered against them
for different offences. After the trial in the criminal
cases, they were convicted and sentenced for the charges
leveled against them, which proceedings have become final.
Therefore, he submits that it is a big fraud played by the
declarants on the revenue officers of the above referred
Districts with a view to defraud the owners of the land
with an oblique motive to come out from the clutches of
the land ceiling under the provisions of the Act, thereby
they have illegally deprived the land owners rights to re-
own the land. At the instance of the land owners, the
impugned order is passed by the State Government who will
be the beneficiaries if the land holdings of the
appellants are declared as surplus after the enquiry is
conducted by the Enquiry Officer, as they would get their
land back under the provisions of the Act. Therefore, the
Page 14
14
learned senior counsel submits that the orders of the land
ceiling proceedings passed by the competent authorities
under Section 21 of the Act, in favour of the declarants
are also erroneously affirmed in the appellate
proceedings, those orders are all tainted with fraud
played by them and therefore, the same cannot be allowed
to sustain in law. It is further contended that the
factual and legal pleas urged by the learned senior
counsel on behalf of the appellants that suo motu exercise
of power by the State Government under Section 45(2) of
the Act cannot be exercised at the belated stage after the
land ceiling proceedings in respect of the land of the
above villages have attained finality, are wholly
untenable in law for the reason that the fraud unravels
everything and therefore, there cannot be a bar for the
State Government to exercise its power on the ground of
limitation for initiating the proceedings in respect of
the land involved in these cases in the public interest.
It is further urged by him that the exercise of power by
the State Government under Section 14(4) of the Act cannot
be termed as illegal having regard to the magnitude of the
fraud played by the declarants in respect of huge extent
Page 15
15
of agricultural wet land to save themselves from the
clutches of the Land Ceiling Act to an extent of 3000 and
odd acres of land which amounts to deprivation of the land
holdings of the land owners, who have leased their land in
favour of the Company and they are entitled to get their
land back after declaring the holdings of the appellants
as surplus after conducting an enquiry and if it is found
the orders passed in favour of the declarants are illegal
as they have played fraud on the officers, which will be
the valuable fundamental and statutory rights conferred
upon the land owners, who are the beneficiaries and in
such an eventuality the Fundamental Rights that would be
accrued in their favour under Articles 19(1)(g) and 21(1)
of the Constitution of India read with Section 21 of the
Act, have been illegally deprived of by them by indulging
in fraudulent acts. It is contended that the plea of the
appellants that the exercise of power by the State
Government in passing the order under Section 14 (4) of
the Act at no stretch of imagination can be termed as
illegal for want of jurisdiction on the ground that it is
barred by limitation, and therefore, he submits that the
appeals are liable to be rejected as they are devoid of
Page 16
16
merit.
12. He has also further placed strong reliance upon the
provisions of Sections 147 and 148 of Land Revenue Code,
which provisions mandate the Revenue Officer to maintain
land revenue records truly and correctly in relation to
holding of the land by the declarants. Section 150 of the
Land Revenue Code provides for making entries of mutations
and register the disputed cases by the concerned Revenue
Officers. Section 296 of the Code provides that notice of
transfer of title of land etc. in favour of the transferee
shall be given to the District Collector which has not
been done in the instant case.
13. The learned senior counsel on behalf of the land
owners in the alternative has further submitted to justify
the impugned orders in the writ petitions which are not
rightly interfered with by the High Court in exercise of
its extraordinary writ jurisdiction by passing the common
impugned judgment and order, based on certain relevant
facts and legal contentions. Further, he would submit that
the said order can be traceable to the executive power
exercised by the State Government under Article 162 of the
Page 17
17
Constitution of India in the larger interest of public.
The legal contention urged on behalf of the appellants
that the exercise of statutory power by the State
Government under Section 14(4) of the Act is bad in law is
wholly untenable in law and therefore, the same is liable
to be rejected. The learned senior counsel Mr. Naphade
submits that the above untenable contentions urged on
behalf of the appellants are liable to be rejected,
particularly, having regard to the fact that huge extent
of land acquired by the share holders and fictitious sub-
leases by fabricating and creating the revenue records of
the land in question to overcome the ceiling limits of
holdings of land, which are criminal offences committed by
the declarants under the Indian Penal Code for which some
of the accused share holders of the Company and others
involved in the criminal cases were charged for the
criminal offences committed by them and have been
convicted and sentenced for the proved charges framed
against them. Therefore, it is contended by him that the
impugned judgment and order need not be interfered with by
this Court in exercise of its appellate jurisdiction.
14. The purpose of the orders issued by the State
Page 18
18
Government is to conduct the administrative enquiry by the
Enquiry Officer appointed by it in relation to the revenue
records of the land in question, which are fabricated
after destroying the original revenue records, with a view
to make unlawful enrichment by the declarants and
therefore the same has to be examined by the Enquiry
Officer after going through the correctness of the entries
in the relevant revenue records pertaining to the land
with reference to the provisions of Land Revenue Code and
he can find out the modus operandi adopted by the share
holders of the Company in creating sub-leases in respect
of the land in favour of 384 persons to overcome the
ceiling provisions of the Act, so as not to get their land
holdings declared as surplus by creating the alleged
fictitious entries in the revenue records without
following provisions of the Land Revenue Code and
destroying the original revenue records. The same cannot
be objected to by the appellants, at this stage as their
rights are not affected and it is premature to examine
their claims as has been urged in the proceedings and
there are no civil consequences upon them.
15. The other untenable contention urged on behalf of the
Page 19
19
appellants that the appellants have not been heard before
passing the impugned order by the High Court and their
statutory right and fundamental rights acquired upon the
lands in question are deprived, is wholly imaginary and
there is no merit in this regard. The learned senior
counsel placed strong reliance upon the constitution bench
Judgment of this Court in the case of State of West Bengal
vs. Committee for Protection of Democratic Rights, West
Bengal and Ors.1 in support of his above submission to justify the impugned judgment and order wherein this Court
in exercise of its extraordinary power under Article 142
of the Constitution, being the conscience keeper of the
society, has laid down the law holding that the CBI can
investigate the criminal case in any State without their
consent in the larger interest of the parties. In view of
the law laid down by this Court in the above case, this
Court need not exercise its appellate jurisdiction in a
matter of this nature as no adverse order are passed by
the State Government against the appellants at this stage,
and it is only stated in the impugned order that enquiry
will be conducted by the Deputy Commissioner of Pune
Division in respect of the land holding of the declarants. 1 (2010) 3 SCC 571
Page 20
20
16. The learned counsel on behalf of the State Government
has also justified the impugned judgment and order
contending that the same is well reasoned order and he has
also adopted the submission made by the learned senior
counsel on behalf of the owners Mr. Shekar Naphade who had
leased their lands to the Company.
17. We have carefully examined the rival factual and legal
contentions urged on behalf of the parties with a view to
find out as to whether the common impugned judgment and
order warrants interference in these appeals. After
careful perusal of the judgment passed in the criminal
appeals, we noticed that some of the appellants were
convicted and sentenced for the offences punishable under
Sections 466, 468, 471, 477A, 120B and 109 of the IPC, in
relation to the offences committed by them in respect of
the land holdings. In the backdrop of the judgment passed
in the criminal cases referred to supra which have
attained finality before this Court, the State Government,
after examining the representations given by the land
owners in these cases with reference to the relevant land
records of the land holders of the villages, has rightly
Page 21
21
exercised its statutory power by appointing the Sub-
Divisional Officer as an Enquiry Officer at the first
instance and later on Deputy Commissioner of Pune was
appointed to enquire into the matter which is in the
larger public interest.
18. The said order is passed by the State Government only
to enquire into the land holding records with a view to
find out as to whether original land revenue records have
been destroyed and fabricated to substantiate their
unjustifiable claim by playing fraud upon the Tehsildar
and appellate authorities to obtain the orders unlawfully
in their favour by showing that there is no surplus land
with the Company and its share holders as the valid sub-
leases are made and they are accepted by them in the
proceedings under Section 21 of the Act, on the basis of
the alleged false declarations filed by the share holders
and sub-lessees under Section 6 of the Act. The plea urged
on behalf of the State Government and the de-facto
complainants-owners, at whose instance the orders are
passed by the State Government on the alleged ground of
fraud played by the declarants upon the Tehsildar and
appellate authorities to get the illegal orders obtained
Page 22
22
by them to come out from the clutches of the land ceiling
provisions of the Act by creating the revenue records,
which is the fraudulent act on their part which unravels
everything and therefore, the question of limitation under
the provisions to exercise power by the State Government
does not arise at all. For this purpose, the Deputy
Commissioner of Pune Division was appointed as the Enquiry
Officer to hold such an enquiry to enquire into the matter
and submit his report for consideration of the Government
to take further action in the matter. The legal contentions urged by Mr. Naphade, in justification of the
impugned judgment and order prima facie at this stage, we
are satisfied that the allegation of fraud in relation to
getting the land holdings of the villages referred to
supra by the declarants on the alleged ground of
destroying original revenue records and fabricating
revenue records to show that there are 384 sub-leases of
the land involved in the proceedings to retain the surplus
land illegally as alleged, to the extent of more than 3000
acres of land and the orders are obtained unlawfully by
the declarants in the land ceiling limits will be nullity
in the eye of law though such orders have attained
Page 23
23
finality, if it is found in the enquiry by the Enquiry
Officer that they are tainted with fraud, the same can be
interfered with by the State Government and its officers
to pass appropriate orders. The land owners are also
aggrieved parties to agitate their rights to get the
orders which are obtained by the declarants as they are
vitiated in law on account of nullity is the tenable
submission and the same is well founded and therefore, we
accept the submission to justify the impugned judgment and
order of the Division Bench of the High Court.
19. The legal submissions made by the learned senior
counsel on behalf of the appellants that the State
Government has no power either under Section 45(2) or
under Section 14 (4) of the Act to appoint an Enquiry
Officer to enquire into the land holdings of the villages
referred to therein are untenable contentions of the
appellants which have been rightly rebutted by the
learned senior counsel Mr. Shekhar Naphade by urging an
alternative legal plea that the power exercised by the
State Government to pass the orders impugned in the writ
petitions is traceable to its executive power under
Article 162 of the Constitution of India. Hence, the same
Page 24
24
shall be accepted by us and the said provision is
extracted hereunder:
“162. Extent of executive power of State Subject to the provisions of this Constitution, the executive power of a State shall extend to the matters with respect to which the Legislature of the State has power to make laws Provided that in any matter with respect to which the Legislature of a State and Parliament have power to make laws, the executive power of the State shall be subject to, and limited by, the executive power expressly conferred by the Constitution or by any law made by Parliament upon the Union or authorities thereof Council of Ministers.”
20. The submission made by the learned senior counsel Mr.
Shekhar Naphade that having regard to the magnitude of
the alleged fraud creating 384 sub-leases illegally in
place of 125 sub-leases in respect of the land in
question to defraud the State Government and the owners
of the land who had leased originally in favour of the
Company with a view to see that the share holders, sub-
lessees to come out from the clutches of the land
ceiling provisions of the Act in respect of the land
involved in these proceedings with a view to deprive the
legitimate statutory rights of the original owners of the
land, who have leased the land in favour of the Company
Page 25
25
to run its factory to manufacture sugar, who will be the
beneficiaries of the surplus land, if their holdings
which leased in favour of the Company and its share
holders is declared as surplus under the provisions of
the Act after conducting an enquiry by the Enquiry
Officer, is the most tenable contention urged by Mr.
Shekhar Nahpade and therefore, the same must be accepted
by this Court. He has also rightly placed reliance upon
the constitution bench judgment of this Court referred to
supra, which decision shall be applied to the fact
situation of these appeals. The learned senior counsel
Mr. Naphade has rightly relied upon the above referred
case to invite our attention that this Court shall not
interfere with the orders passed by the State Government
or the impugned judgment and order of the High Court in
upholding the orders of the State Government as the same
is passed by it keeping in view the larger interest of
the public having regard to the criminality proved
against some of the share holders, who were the accused
persons in the criminal cases instituted against them.
We are satisfied with the submission made by the learned
senior counsel on behalf of the de facto complaints at
Page 26
26
this stage as the same is tenable and well founded and
public interest involved in this case.
21. The apprehension in the mind of the appellants that
their statutory, fundamental and constitutional rights
guaranteed under the provisions of the Act and Articles
14, 19 and 21 read with 300A of the Constitution of India
are infringed at this stage is premature and
misconceived. Therefore, the question of issuing notices
to them by the State Government before passing the orders
in appointing the Deputy Commissioner as an Enquiry
Officer to conduct administrative enquiry in relation to
the land holdings of the land of the Company, the share
holders and the appellants herein to find out whether the
land revenue records of the land of the villages referred
to supra are destroyed and fabricated on that basis the
declarants have declared that they do not own surplus
land, the State Government has not passed effective
orders at this stage to take away the valuable rights of
the appellants as claimed by them and therefore, the
question of giving opportunity to them at this stage and
conducting enquiry before passing the orders is wholly
untenable in law, as the orders are only administrative
Page 27
27
in nature by appointing an officer to enquire into the
alleged fraud on the officers, who have decided the
declarations of the share holders and sub-lessees
favourably on the basis of fabricated revenue records by
destroying original records of the land of villages
referred to supra, with the deliberate intention to come
out from the clutches of the Act. Therefore, the rights
of the appellants are not affected on the date of passing
of the orders by the State Government. Therefore, the
contentions urged by the learned senior counsel on behalf
of the appellants referred to supra are wholly untenable
and the same are liable to be rejected and accordingly
rejected.
22. For the reasons stated supra we do not want to go
into the merits of the case. Apart from the said reasons,
we have very carefully scrutinized the impugned common
judgment and order of the High Court and the orders of
the State Government and we do not find any reason
whatsoever to interfere with the same as none of the
legal contentions urged on behalf of the appellants have
got any merit consideration. In our considered view, the
orders impugned in the writ petitions which are affirmed
Page 28
28
by the High Court, are perfectly legal and valid and
therefore, the same do not warrant interference by this
Court in exercise of power of this Court under Article
136 of the Constitution, but on the other hand, the
aforesaid orders of the State Government can also be
traceable to executive power of the State Government
under Article 162 of the Constitution of India having
regard to the magnitude of the alleged fraud in relation
to the vast extent of the land holding obtained by the
declarants by giving false declarations with a view to
come out from the clutches of the land ceiling provisions
of the Act, which is the prima facie view taken by the
State Government and the same cannot be found fault with
by this Court in these proceedings at this stage.
23. It is noticed by this Court that right from the year
1989, the orders passed by the State Government have been
successfully stalled by the appellants to conduct the
administrative enquiry into the matter for the last
quarter century, the most valuable period is lost in the
process of untenable litigation made by the appellants.
Therefore, we direct the State Government and the Enquiry
Officer appointed for the purpose or if the said Officer
Page 29
29
has already retired, then the Deputy Commissioner of the
Pune Division who is in office at present is required to
expedite the administrative enquiry within six months as
directed by the High Court in its operative portion of
the order or any officer can be appointed by the State
Government in his place within two weeks from the date of
receipt of this order and submit compliance report to
this Court for its perusal and further direct the State
Government to proceed with the matter in accordance with
law after affording opportunity to all the parties.
For the foregoing reasons, the impugned judgment and
order of the Division Bench in affirming the orders of
the State Government is not required to be interfered
with for one more reason, namely, the High Court, after
adverting to certain findings recorded in the criminal
cases with regard to the land ceiling and on the alleged
fraud against the declarants in getting the orders passed
under Section 21 of the Act, has recorded the findings
and reasons holding that the orders of the State
Government do not warrant interference as the same are in
the interest of public at large.
Page 30
30
In view of the foregoing reasons, the appeals are
dismissed with costs of Rs.50,000/- to be paid by the
appellants in each of these appeals out of which 50% to
be given to the State Government of Maharashtra, and the
remaining 50% to be given to the contesting private
respondents at whose instance the orders were passed by
the State Government. The parties are directed to
maintain status quo regarding the nature of land and not
to create any encumbrance upon the land involved in these
proceedings till the enquiry is over.
……………………………………………………J. [V. GOPALA GOWDA]
……………………………………………………J. [C. NAGAPPAN] New Delhi, February 11, 2015