Legal Provisions Involved: Sections 123 and 143 of the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950 and Article 136, Constitution of India.
Judgement by: Supreme Court of India
Judge/Bench: Justice S.V.N. Bhatti and Justice R. Mahadevan
Facts
The Appellants purchased the land in 1984 and obtained a declaration under Section 143 converting it from agricultural to residential use. However, Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe members had occupied the land since 1976–1977 and constructed houses. The SDO directed regularisation of their possession under Section 123, which has been challenged by the Appellants.
Key Legal Provisions
Sections 123 and 143 of the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950 and Article 136 of the Constitution of India
Issues raised
- Whether a regularisation under Section 123 regularisation applies despite a declaration under Section 143?
- Whether unauthorised occupation can be statutorily regularised?
Arguments of the case
The Appellants argued that the declaration under Section 143 divests Revenue Authorities of jurisdiction and the trespassers should be evicted while the Respondents argued that occupants changed land features before purchase thereby disentitling the Appellants.
Judgement
The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, holding that Section 123(2) creates a legal fiction deeming land settled with house owners in possession before 30.06.1985, regardless of consent or the Section 143 declaration.
Click here to VIEW the full judgement.
