Gujarat HC Sets Aside Fragmentation Orders Against Heirs’ 2007 Land Purchase, Applying Amendment Deeming the Transfer Regularised

The petitioners challenged orders cancelling the revenue entry for a sale of 0-60-70 hectares from Block No. 58, Village Dedarda, on the ground that the transaction created a fragment contrary to the Bombay Prevention of Fragmentation and Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1947.

The Deputy Collector upheld the cancellation on 10 October 2014, and the Special Secretary (Appeals) dismissed the petitioners’ revision on 4 January 2016.

Before the High Court, the petitioners relied on newly inserted Section 9(4), which provided for regularisation of specified transfers made up to 31 March 2026.

Whether the petitioners’ transfer, alleged to have contravened the Act by creating a fragment, was deemed regularised under Section 9(4).

Whether the Deputy Collector’s and Special Secretary’s orders cancelling the revenue entry should therefore be quashed.

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

The judgment relied on this statutory provision and cited no judicial precedents.

The Court found that the challenged sale fell within the statutory period and that the authorities had cancelled the sale entry because the transaction allegedly violated the Act by creating a fragment without prior permission.

It accordingly held that the transfer was deemed regularised under Section 9(4).

Although it observed that no proceedings remained pending and thus abatement did not arise, that did not prevent the statutory regularisation from applying.

It quashed the Special Secretary’s order dated 4 January 2016 and the Deputy Collector’s order dated 10 October 2014, and made the rule absolute.