Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 105248 (ALL)

NARESH KUMAR v. COMMISSIONER MORADABAD REGION AND 2 OTHERS

WRIC/37240/2024 · 2025-07-30

Rohit Ranjan Agarwal

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:128106 Court No. - 34 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 37240 of 2024 Petitioner :- Naresh Kumar Respondent :- Commissioner Moradabad Region And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Arvind Kumar Mishra,Raghwendra Prasad Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Rohit Ranjan Agarwal,J. 1. The petitioner claims that he has purchased the property in dispute from one Buddh Singh on 27.05.2013. Both the vendor and vendee belong to the Scheduled Caste community and the provisions of Section -157-AA of U.P.Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950 (hereinafter referred to as "Act of 1950") are not attracted as the transfer is not by a Scheduled Caste person to the person outside the Scheduled Caste community. 2. The mutation application, filed by the petitioner, was allowed. The daughter of Buddh Singh had filed a restoration application, which was allowed. The petitioner had filed a restoration application for restoring the initial mutation order, which was rejected against which a revision has been filed which has also been rejected. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is no violation of provision of Section 157-AA of Act of 1950 as the transfer is between the members of Scheduled Caste community. According to him, the sale is not barred under the said provision and the Court below had wrongly recalled the order of mutation on the application moved by the daughter of Buddh Singh. The revenue authorities have also wrongly rejected the restoration application as well as revision of the petitioner. 4. Learned Standing Counsel has opposed the writ petition but could not dispute the fact that in case of transfer by a member of Schedule Caste Community to another member of the same community, the provision of Section 157-AA of Act of 1950 are not attracted. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material on record. 6. Sub-section (1) of Section 157-AA of Act of 1950 starts with non obstante clause. It provides that no person belonging to a Scheduled Caste having become a bhumidhar with transferable rights under Section 131-B shall have the right to transfer the land by way of sale, gift, mortgage or lease to a person other than a person belonging to a Scheduled Caste. Sub-Section (1) of Section 157-AA of Act of 1950 is extracted hereasunder : "157-AA. Restrictions on transfer by member of Scheduled Castes becoming Bhumidhar under Section 131-B.(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in Section 157-A and without prejudice to the restrictions contained in Sections 153 to 157, no person belonging to Scheduled Caste having become a Bhumidhar with transferable rights under Section 131-B shall have the right to transfer the land by way of sale, gift, mortgage or lease to a person other than a person belonging to a Scheduled Caste and such transfer, if any, shall be in the following order of preference :- (a) landless agricultural labourer; (b) marginal farmer; (c) small farmer; and (d) a person other than a person referred to in Clauses (a), (b) and (c)." 7. Further, sub-section (4) provides that no transfer under this section shall be made except with the prior approval of the Assistant Collector. Relevant sub-section (4) of Section 157-AA of Act of 1950 is extracted hereas under: "(4) No transfer under this section shall be made except with the previous approval of the concerned Assistant Collector." 8. The purport of sub-section (4), which restricts the transfer subject to previous approval of Assistant Collector has to read in harmony with sub-section (1). 9. The provision of Section 157-AA of Act of 1950 does not restricts any transfer as far as it is made to a person of a Scheduled Caste community itself. 10. The provision of Section 157-AA is a beneficial provision for the member of Scheduled Caste community to protect their interest in the land which has been allotted to them over which the bhumidhari rights has accrued in their favour, is not transferred outside their community. 11. When any member of Scheduled Caste community proposes to transfer the land by way of sale or gift, he needs previous sanction of an Assistant Collector, as provided under sub-section (4) of Section 157-AA of Act of 1950. Sub-section (4) of Section 157-AA of Act of 1950 has to be read in consonance with sub-section (1). However, sub-section (1) clearly provides that when such sale, gift or mortgage is made to a person other than a person belonging to a Scheduled Caste community. 12. Once it is clear that the transfer by way of sale, gift, mortgage or lease is between the members of Scheduled Caste Community, the provision is not attracted. 13. In the instant case, it is admitted fact that the sale, which was made in the year 2013 by Buddh Singh, was in favour of a person belonging to Scheduled Caste Community i.e. the petitioner. Hence, the order of mutation, which was carried out, could not have been recalled on the application moved by the daughter on the basis of contravention of provision of Section 157-AA of Act of 1950. 14. In view of the said fact, the orders dated 24.07.2024 passed by respondent No.1 in Revision No.1327 of 2024 as well as 15.05.2024 passed by respondent No.2 in Case No.740 of 2024 are hereby set aside. The matter is relegated to the revenue Court for deciding the mutation application afresh in the light of the provision of Section 157-AA of Act of 1950 after hearing all the affected parties within a period of two month from the date of production of a certified copy of this order. 15. Writ petition stands partly allowed. Order Date :- 31.7.2025 Kushal Digitally signed by :- KUSHAL AGRAWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad