Supreme Court Dismisses Allottees' Plea Against Collector's 1974 Order For Forfeiture Of Alwara Lands In Dadra And Nagar Haveli

The Supreme Court today dismissed the pleas filed by allottees of Alwara lands in the Union Territory of Dadra and Nagar Haveli, which challenged the Collector's order for their forfeiture.

A bench of Justices Surya Kant, Dipankar Datta and N Kotiswar Singh delivered the judgment, holding that the Collector's order of 1974 was not actuated by malafides. It also vacated the status quo order passed in 2006.

Factual Background

The appellant-allottees were allotted the lands during the Portuguese regime. After the area of Dadra and Nagar Haveli was freed from said regime in 1954, the lands were granted to the appellants/their predecessors. In 1969, the Collector exercised power of the Administrator and forfeited the lands allotted to the appellants on account of their failure to cultivate the same. The power was exercised under the Agrarian Law applicable to Dadra and Nagar Haveli.

Initially, when the appellants challenged the Collector's orders, a Division Bench of the Bombay High Court, in 1973, quashed the impugned orders. However, it was observed that the Collector was not precluded from taking action under Article 12 of the Agrarian law after giving a fair and reasonable opportunity to the appellants. Accordingly, after issuing notices and giving opportunity to respond, the Collector, in 1974, passed an order by which Alwara lands of the appellants were forfeited.

The appellants challenged the forfeiture in separate suits, which were decreed by the trial court. The Appellate Court dismissed appeals preferred by the Union of India and Administration of Dadra and Nagar Haveli. In 2005, the Bombay High Court allowed the appeals preferred by the respondent-authorities and set aside the judgments and decrees of lower courts. The suits of the appellants were dismissed. Aggrieved, they approached the Supreme Court.

Issues

In its judgment, the Court dealt with the following issues:

- What was the true nature of the rights in the land granted to the appellants?

- Whether the High Court was justified in interfering with and reversing the concurrent findings of the Courts below?

- Whether the recission of the grant on the ground of non-cultivation under Article 12 of the Agrarian law (OA, short for, Organizacao Agraria) could be vitiated on the ground of waiver, acquiescence, delay or condonation?

- Whether the order of the Collector was vitiated by malafides, arbitrariness, or was otherwise unsustainable in law?

Court Observations

After hearing the parties on the above issues, the Court observed that the governing law for determining the nature and extent of the rights in the lands granted to the appellants was the Agrarian law (OA) and the inquiry had to be confined to its provisions. On the second issue, it held that the High Court, by reversing the concurrent findings of the courts below, did not transgress the limits of its jurisdiction under Section 100 CPC.

Further, the Court rejected the appellants' pleas of waiver, acquiescence, delay, impossibility and condonation, saying that they had no legal or factual basis. On the fourth issue, it was stated that the Collector's order was not tainted by malafides and could not be construed as having been passed with the "intent to disentitle the appellants from the statutory benefits under the 1971 Land Reforms Regulation".

Case Title: DIVYAGNAKUMARI HARISINH PARMAR AND ORS. Versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS., C.A. No. 1479/2006 (and connected cases)

Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 942

Click Here To Read/Download Judgment 

Also Read - No Estoppel Against Govt In Exercise Of Sovereign, Legislative Or Executive Power : Supreme Court