Tweet
Purchasing real estate in ‘devbhoomi’ Uttarakhand will now be an uphill task. A law that made State consent mandatory for purchase of any plot of land over 250 square metres has got an interim nod from the Supreme Court. The apex court has stayed the operation of the Uttarakhand High Court order, which had last month struck down the law as unconstitutional.
The State Government informed the SC about a disturbing trend of ‘infiltration’ from international borders along Nepal and China from where people were acquiring land in Uttarakhand. The Government claimed it had serious security ramifications.
The court decision has come as a big blow for persons eyeing to buy property on agricultural land in Uttarakhand. The law titled The Uttarakhand (The UP Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950) Amendment Act 2003 was aimed to protect farming community and consolidate farming land that constitutes barely 12 per cent of the entire land in the State. There is a dearth of cultivable land in the State as 67 per cent of the State is under dense forest cover.
To achieve this, a cut-off date of September 12, 2003 was fixed. All transactions prior to this date were untouched while all land deals (of over 250 square metres) beyond this date required scrutiny and permission of the District Collector. The HC found no reason in a law that created two classes of people separated by an arbitrary dividing line and struck down the contentious provisions of the law on September 22, 2011. Against this order, the State Government approached the apex court.
State counsel Rachana Srivastava mentioned the matter before a bench of Justices BS Chauhan and AK Pattnaik and got the HC order stayed. To decide on the validity of the law in question, the court issued notices to the two petitioners Sarvesh Sharma and Manoj Kumar, whose petitions before the HC had yielded the order under challenge.
In its petition, the Uttarakhand Government pointed out disturbing security connotations that forced the State to bring a law. Sharing international boundaries with Nepal and China, the appeal filed by State Chief Secretary said, “Due to large number of indiscriminate transactions of the limited agricultural land of the state by individuals and vested interest groups, a situation was created to alienate the agricultural community. This inter alia posed a risk of settlement of external agencies or individuals with criminal, terrorist and anti-social link as the State has extensive international boundaries with Nepal and China.”
As this trend increased, according to the State at an “alarming rate”, the law was enacted in 2003 to “prevent instances of any such activity” and also to “provide economic stability” since land is scarce in the State. The Bill became law after it got Governor’s assent in January 2004.
Sections 129B and several sub-sections of Section 154 of the said Act were the most contentious of the lot. The law carved out a separate category of land deals made in excess of 250 square metres to which a different rule was applicable. While on one hand the regulation aimed primarily at outsiders purchasing land in the State, the law applied equally to residents, making it impossible for persons within the family to sell or purchase land without obtaining sanction of the Collector.
By the revival of the law, although temporarily, Uttarakhand has joined the league of States which prohibit or regulate sale of land within their territorial limits by outsiders. In the past, Himachal Pradesh, Arunachal Pradesh, Sikkim, and Jammu and Kashmir have enacted similar laws.
The State Government informed the SC about a disturbing trend of ‘infiltration’ from international borders along Nepal and China from where people were acquiring land in Uttarakhand. The Government claimed it had serious security ramifications.
The court decision has come as a big blow for persons eyeing to buy property on agricultural land in Uttarakhand. The law titled The Uttarakhand (The UP Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950) Amendment Act 2003 was aimed to protect farming community and consolidate farming land that constitutes barely 12 per cent of the entire land in the State. There is a dearth of cultivable land in the State as 67 per cent of the State is under dense forest cover.
To achieve this, a cut-off date of September 12, 2003 was fixed. All transactions prior to this date were untouched while all land deals (of over 250 square metres) beyond this date required scrutiny and permission of the District Collector. The HC found no reason in a law that created two classes of people separated by an arbitrary dividing line and struck down the contentious provisions of the law on September 22, 2011. Against this order, the State Government approached the apex court.
State counsel Rachana Srivastava mentioned the matter before a bench of Justices BS Chauhan and AK Pattnaik and got the HC order stayed. To decide on the validity of the law in question, the court issued notices to the two petitioners Sarvesh Sharma and Manoj Kumar, whose petitions before the HC had yielded the order under challenge.
In its petition, the Uttarakhand Government pointed out disturbing security connotations that forced the State to bring a law. Sharing international boundaries with Nepal and China, the appeal filed by State Chief Secretary said, “Due to large number of indiscriminate transactions of the limited agricultural land of the state by individuals and vested interest groups, a situation was created to alienate the agricultural community. This inter alia posed a risk of settlement of external agencies or individuals with criminal, terrorist and anti-social link as the State has extensive international boundaries with Nepal and China.”
As this trend increased, according to the State at an “alarming rate”, the law was enacted in 2003 to “prevent instances of any such activity” and also to “provide economic stability” since land is scarce in the State. The Bill became law after it got Governor’s assent in January 2004.
Sections 129B and several sub-sections of Section 154 of the said Act were the most contentious of the lot. The law carved out a separate category of land deals made in excess of 250 square metres to which a different rule was applicable. While on one hand the regulation aimed primarily at outsiders purchasing land in the State, the law applied equally to residents, making it impossible for persons within the family to sell or purchase land without obtaining sanction of the Collector.
By the revival of the law, although temporarily, Uttarakhand has joined the league of States which prohibit or regulate sale of land within their territorial limits by outsiders. In the past, Himachal Pradesh, Arunachal Pradesh, Sikkim, and Jammu and Kashmir have enacted similar laws.
