Collector Cannot Scrutinize Title or Decades-Old Tenancy Proceedings While Deciding Section 65 NA Use Applications

In brief

The question

1. Whether the authorities exceeded their jurisdiction under Section 65 of the Code by inquiring into the validity of old revenue entries and the agriculturist status of the occupants.

The court held

The court quashed and set aside the impugned orders dated May 19, 2023, and January 10, 2023, holding that they exceeded the jurisdictional scope of Section 65

It also directed

The matter was remanded to the District Collector, Banaskantha. The court directed that any fresh application for N.A. Use Permission be decided strictly in accordance with the principles of Section 65 and the cited precedents within the statutory period. The petition was partly allowed

01Facts

The petitioners applied for Non-Agricultural (N.A.) Use Permission under Section 65 of the Gujarat Land Revenue Code for land in Palanpur

p. 3

The Respondent No. 3 (Collector) and Respondent No. 2 (Revisory Authority) rejected the application on May 19, 2023

pp. 1-2

The rejection was based on three grounds: (i) the need to inquire into the validity of 1970 tenancy proceedings; (ii) unclear agriculturist status of persons entered via Entry No. 4566 (dated 1982); and (iii) variations in the land area

pp. 2-3

The petitioners challenged these orders, arguing that the authorities exceeded their jurisdiction by questioning long-settled titles and status during an N.A. permission inquiry

p. 2

02Issues

i.1. Whether the authorities exceeded their jurisdiction under Section 65 of the Code by inquiring into the validity of old revenue entries and the agriculturist status of the occupants.

p. 2 / para. 3

ii.2. Whether the Collector can go beyond the scope of "occupancy" and "agricultural use" to examine the title of the applicant during N.A. permission proceedings.

p. 6 / para. 39

03Law Applied

The court applied Section 65 of the Gujarat Land Revenue Code, 1879, which governs the procedure for occupants of agricultural land to apply for permission to use land for non-agricultural purposes

p. 2

Tusharbhai Harjibhai Ghelani v. State of Gujarat [2019 (4) GLR 2578], which established that the Collector’s inquiry under Section 65 is limited to verifying if the applicant is the "occupant" in the revenue records and if the land is held for agriculture; it is not an adversary proceeding to determine title

p. 4, 6

Division Bench ruling in LPA No. 1181 of 2025, which prohibited "digging graves" by questioning decades-old revenue entries to reject N.A. applications

pp. 4-5

Provisions in the judgment · 2

Bombay Land Revenue Code, 1879 Section 65Section 3

04Reasoning

The court reasoned that under Section 65, the Collector possesses limited powers to conduct a summary inquiry regarding legal occupation and current land use

p. 7

In this case, the authorities "cross-utilized" powers by dwelling into the Gujarat Tenancy and Agricultural Land Act to question a family arrangement (Entry No. 4566) certified in 1982

p. 3

The court noted that since no tenancy proceedings had ever been initiated to challenge the petitioners' status as agriculturists, the Collector could not use an N.A. application as a pretext to reopen settled transactions from 1970 or 1982

p. 2, 7

Citing Tushar Ghelani, the court emphasized that Section 65 does not empower the Collector to undertake a title inquiry or conclude regarding the legality of the occupant's ownership

pp. 6-7

05Holding

The court quashed and set aside the impugned orders dated May 19, 2023, and January 10, 2023, holding that they exceeded the jurisdictional scope of Section 65

pp. 7-8

pp. 8-9

LawLens.Gujarat High Court

Original Court PDF