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