Sale, Bequest Of Tenancy Rights By Member Of SC/ST Category To Person Who Isn't From Community Is Void Under State Tenancy Law: Rajasthan HC

Referring to a division bench's decision on the subject, Justice Avneesh Jhingan in his order said:

"The issue is no longer res-integra and has been decided by the Division Bench of this Court in Sita Ram Vs. Board of Revenue reported in [2012 SCC OnLine Raj 2502]. It was held that the person purchasing the land in contravention of Section 42 of the Act of 1955 cannot acquire khatedari rights by the adverse possession".

The court was hearing a petition against the dismissal of a suit filed for declaration of khatedari rights of a land by the petitioners.

The land was purchased in 1965 from the father of the respondent who belonged to the Schedules Caste. The respondent filed an application for ejectment of the petitioners which was dismissed in 1978. Pursuant to this, a suit for declaration was filed by the petitioners for being declared as a khatedars of land which was dismissed in 1997.

The dismissal of the suit was on the ground that the sale of the land in 1965 was against Section 42(b) of the Act, and hence the petitioners could not claim the khatedari rights over it. This was upheld by the Revenue Appellate Authority and the Board of Revenue. The Petitioners review was also dismissed by the Board.Hence, the petitioners moved the high court.  

It was the case of the petitioners that since they were in adverse possession of the land that had attained finality when the respondent's application for their ejectment was dismissed, the suit should have been decreed on the principle of res-judicata.

The court considered that question whether the khatedari rights on the basis of adverse possession can be claimed over the land belonging to SC/ST category, purchased in violation of Section 42 of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act.

The high court referred to the division bench's judgment in Sita Ram v Board of Revenue where it was said that, “land cannot be permitted to be entered in the name of the persons, who are seeking khatedari rights on the basis of the adverse possession, as Section 42 of the Act prohibits transfer of land by khatedar tenant belonging to Scheduled Caste to a person, who does not belong to Scheduled Caste, observed that the prohibition is absolute.”

Furthermore, the high court said that the principle of res-judicata was not applicable here since the subject matter of the two cases was different. In the application for ejection, the issue was whether the petitioners were in adverse possession of the land and thus were trespassers or not. While in the present case, the issue was whether the petitioner could claim khatedari rights of a land belonging to an SC based on adverse possession.

The court said that the suit was rightly dismissed by the provision of Section 42(b) of the Act of 1955 and in the light of decision in Sita Ram that the khatedari rights of a land belonging to SC cannot be claimed on the basis of adverse possession. 

The plea was thus dismissed. 

Title: Anandi Lal & Anr. v Shri Dalip Prajapat & Ors.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Raj) 61