Gujarat amendment regularising decades of fragmented-land transfers leads High Court to quash cancellation orders in a 2004 sale case

The petitioner purchased 0-45-48 of land from Block No. 551 by registered sale deed dated 21 January 2004.

The sale entry was recorded as Mutation Entry No. 3384, but following objections by respondents, the entry was rejected on the ground that the transaction resulted in a fragment contrary to the Gujarat Prevention of Fragmentation and Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1947.

The rejection was upheld through the revenue hierarchy, including by the SSRD on 25 April 2017.

The petitioner challenged that decision under Articles 226 and 227, relying on the 2026 amendment to Section 9 of the Act.

1. Whether Section 9(4) of the Act applied to the petitioner’s 2004 transfer and deemed it regularised.

2. Whether, in light of that provision, the orders rejecting the mutation entry should be quashed.

Section 9(4) of the Gujarat Prevention of Fragmentation and Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1947, as added by the amendment referred to in the judgment, provides that a transfer or partition contrary to the Act, made from 29 January 1948 through 31 March 2026, is deemed regularised without penalty or premium; pending proceedings before an officer or authority concerning such transfer or partition abate.

No judicial precedent was cited.

The Court found that the petitioner’s sale deed dated 21 January 2004 fell within the period specified in Section 9(4).

Because the mutation entry had been rejected on the basis that the sale contravened the Act, the statutory deeming provision regularised the transfer without penalty or premium.

The Court also observed that no proceedings concerning breach of the Act remained pending, so the provision’s abatement clause did not arise on these facts.

The final paragraph describes the SSRD order as dated 10 May 2010, although the judgment earlier identifies the challenged SSRD order as dated 25 April 2017.