JAYANTRAO AMRATRAO PRADHAN versus PARTHASARTHY, COLLECTOR OF KAIRA DISTRICT AND OTHERS
Proceedings for resumption of watan lands under Rule 4 of the Resumption Rules, 1908, which were pending before the Collector on April 1, 1963, relate to a liability incurred under an incident of a patel watan prior to that date. These proceedings are expressly saved by Section 22 of the Gujarat Patel Watans Abolition Act, 1961, and may be continued even after the Act has come into force. The grant in question was of land (not merely of revenue) and thus subject to resumption. Lands given as compensation for acquired watan lands were of the same nature and class, also subject to resumption.
- Parties
- Appellant: Jayantrao Amratrao Pradhan; Respondents: Parthasarathy, Collector of Kaira District and Others
- Jurisdiction
- India
- Judgment Date
- 01 April 1986
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Final Decision by Supreme Court of India
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed with costs.
- Legal Topics
- Patel Watans Abolition, Service Inam Lands, Jurisdiction of Collector, Resumption Proceedings
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Jayantrao Amratrao Pradhan
Appellant
Parthasarathy, Collector of Kaira District and Others
Respondents
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Final Decision by Supreme Court of India
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the Collector had jurisdiction to resume watan lands after the coming into force of the Gujarat Patel Watans Abolition Act, 1961
- 2 Whether notice and opportunity of hearing was properly given in resumption proceedings
- 3 Nature of the original grant (soil or revenue grant)
Ratio Decidendi
Proceedings for resumption of watan lands under Rule 4 of the Resumption Rules, 1908, which were pending before the Collector on April 1, 1963, relate to a liability incurred under an incident of a patel watan prior to that date. These proceedings are expressly saved by Section 22 of the Gujarat Patel Watans Abolition Act, 1961, and may be continued even after the Act has come into force. The grant in question was of land (not merely of revenue) and thus subject to resumption. Lands given as compensation for acquired watan lands were of the same nature and class, also subject to resumption.
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed with costs.
Orders
- Appeal is dismissed with costs.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment