Supreme Court of India (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)

Appeal (Civil), 1751 of 2015, Judgment Date: Feb 11, 2015

  • In our  considered  view,  the
    orders impugned in the writ petitions which are affirmed by the High  Court,
    are perfectly legal and  valid  and  therefore,  the  same  do  not  warrant
    interference by this Court in exercise of power of this Court under  Article
    136 of the Constitution, but on the other hand, the aforesaid orders of  the
    State Government can also be traceable  to  executive  power  of  the  State
    Government under Article 162 of the Constitution of India having  regard  to
    the magnitude of the alleged fraud in relation to the  vast  extent  of  the
    land holding obtained by the declarants by giving false declarations with  a
    view to come out from the clutches of the land  ceiling  provisions  of  the
    Act, which is the prima facie view taken by the  State  Government  and  the
    same cannot be found fault with by this Court in these proceedings  at  this
    stage.
  • the  appeals  are  dismissed  with
    costs of Rs.50,000/- to be paid by the appellants

                                                             NON REPORTABLE

                        IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
                        CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
                       CIVIL APPEAL NO. 1751  OF 2015
                  (Arising out of SLP (C) No. 9710 of 2007)


 MADHUKAR SADBHA SHIVARKAR (D) BY LRS.                       ...APPELLANTS
                                       Vs.
 STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.                               ... RESPONDENTS

                                     WITH

                        CIVIL APPEAL NO. 1752 OF 2015
                  (Arising out of SLP (C) No. 9816 of 2007)

 SUVARNA VIJAYRAO RASKAR                                .........APPELLANT
                                       Vs.
 STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.                              .... RESPONDENTS

                                     WITH

                        CIVIL APPEAL NO. 1753  OF 2015
                  (Arising out of SLP (C) No. 11179 of 2007)

 RAJANIBAI MADHUKAR SAPKAL                             .........APPELLANT
                                           Vs.
 STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.                             .... RESPONDENTS

                                           AND

                        CIVIL APPEAL NO. 1754  OF 2015
                 (Arising out of SLP (C) No. 12473 of 2007)

 SUVARNA VIJAYRAO RASKAR & ORS                        .........APPELLANTS
                                         Vs.
 STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.                             .... RESPONDENTS




                               J U D G M E N T
V.GOPALA GOWDA, J.

 Leave granted in all the special leave petitions.

2.  Aggrieved by the common judgment and order dated  22.12.2006  passed  by
the High Court of Judicature  at  Bombay  in  various  Writ  Petitions,  the
appellants have filed these appeals by questioning the  correctness  of  the
same by raising certain questions of  law  and  urging  various  grounds  in
support of the same and requested this Court for setting aside the same  and
issue writ of certiorari to quash the orders dated  21.10.1986,  23.06.1988,
7.8.1989 and 31.10.1989 passed by the State Government in  exercise  of  its
power under Section 14(4) of the Maharashtra Agricultural Lands (Ceiling  on
Holdings) Act, 1961 (in short  'the  Act')  appointing  the  Sub  Divisional
Officer, Pandharpur as Enquiry Officer to hold enquiry  in  respect  of  the
land holders whose names are mentioned against the land held by them in  the
said orders. As per  the  affidavit  filed  by  Shri  Shankar  Narayan,  the
Assistant  Collector,  Pandharpur,  by  an  order   dated   27.9.1991,   the
Government had modified original orders dated 7.8.1989  and  31.10.1989  and
in  supersession  of  those  orders,  the  Government  has  designated   the
Assistant Commissioner of Land Records, Pune as Enquiry  Officer  which  was
subsequently designated the Deputy Commissioner  of  Pune  Division  as  the
Enquiry Officer.

3.    For the sake of brevity, the relevant brief resume of facts and  legal
contentions urged on behalf of the parties in C.A.  @  SLP(c)  No.  9710  of
2007 are stated in this judgment with a view to find out as to whether  this
Court is required to exercise its appellate jurisdiction under  Article  136
of the Constitution of India to interfere with  the  impugned  judgment  and
order of the High Court and the  orders  passed  by  the  Maharashtra  State
Government impugned in the writ petitions.

   The Saswad Mali Sugar Factory Ltd.,  Malinagar,  District  Solapur  is  a
Company registered  some time in the year 1932-1933 under the provisions  of
the Indian Companies Act 1956. The  Company  purchased  1500-1600  acres  of
perennially irrigated land at Akluj, Bijwadi, Tambave and Mahalung  Villages
in Malshiras Taluka.  During the said period, the Company  took  5000  acres
of land on lease from the various land  owners  in  the  said  villages  and
thereafter, created sub-leases in favour of  its  share  holders.  125  sub-
leases were created and land was allotted to  shareholders  by  the  Company
between 50-500 acres in favour of each one of the  share  holders  and  such
holdings of land continued till 26.01.1962, when  the  said  Act  came  into
force.  As per the provisions of the Act, an individual was only allowed  to
hold 18 acres of irrigated land.  The  cut-off  date  for  determining  land
holding under  the  Act  was  04.08.1959.  It  is  the  case  of  the  State
Government that the share holders of the Company fearing loss of their  land
holdings in collusion with the revenue authorities manipulated  the  revenue
records of the land involved in the proceedings with a mala  fide  intention
to show that besides the holdings of land by the  Company,  there  were  384
sub-leases  of  the  land  altogether.  It  is   its   further   case   that
lavanchitthis for the period  1959-1960  to  1961-1962  were  destroyed  and
false revenue records were created to substantiate the holding of  384  sub-
leases in respect of the land which was in the name of the Company.

4.  In the year 1964, the original landowners from whom land  was  taken  by
the Company realized the fraud played by the Company and its  share  holders
upon the Revenue authorities of the Act and filed a complaint with the  Anti
Corruption Bureau (ACB) challenging the manipulation of revenue  records  by
the Company of  its  shares  in  collusion  with  the  Revenue  Officers  to
investigate into the fabricated records.

After the aforesaid Act came into force, the  land  ceiling  proceedings  of
the land holdings of the share holders of the Company and the  alleged  sub-
lessees took place and it was held by the  Tahsildar  under  the  Act,  that
everybody held the land within the ceiling limit and the said  decision  was
appealed and attained finality in  the  year  1977,  as  the  appeals  filed
against the orders passed in the land appeals were also dismissed.

5.  In the year 1974, the  ACB  obtained  permission  from  the  Maharashtra
State Government to investigate into the alleged offences  punishable  under
Sections 466,  468,  471,  477A,  120B  and  109  of  the  IPC,  which  were
registered after investigation of the case by the said  Bureau  against  the
share holders of the Company and  others.   The  said  criminal  cases  were
tried by the Special Judge, Solapur against the accused persons  in  special
case Nos. 2, 5 to 7  of  1975.   The  accused  persons,  namely,  the  share
holders were convicted for different  offences  and  accordingly,  sentenced
them to undergo imprisonment for the period mentioned in  the  judgment  and
order of the Special Judge.  Aggrieved by the aforesaid judgment  and  order
of the Special Judge, the accused persons preferred criminal appeals  before
the High Court which passed judgments and orders dated  6.2.1985,  2.4.1985,
20.4.1985 and  23.4.1985  respectively  dismissing  the  said  appeals.  The
accused persons preferred special leave petitions before  this  Court  which
were also dismissed in the year 1985.

6.  The State Government forwarded the aforesaid judgment and order  of  the
Special Judge in criminal cases to the  District  Collector  asking  him  to
conduct enquiry and determine the surplus land involved  in  the  cases.  In
view of the aforesaid conviction and the order of  sentence  passed  by  the
Special Judge and confirmed by the High Court  and  this  Court,  the  State
Government in exercise of its power under Section  14(4)  of  the  Act  vide
order dated 27.9.1991 designated the Asstt. Commissioner, Pune  Division  as
Enquiry Officer to make an enquiry pertaining to  the  list  of  bogus  land
holders.

7.  Some of the appellants in the connected appeals  who are  purchasers  of
the land from the Company's share holders who were accused and  persons  who
were acquitted in the criminal case, and some of the  appellants   who  were
not the accused in the criminal case, had  also  filed  the  writ  petitions
before the High Court questioning the correctness of  the  order  passed  by
the State Government under the aforesaid provisions of  the  Act  appointing
the Enquiry Officer to conduct enquiry pertaining to the list of bogus  land
holders mentioned in the impugned order.

8.  It is urged by Mr. Kapil Sibal, Mr. Aryama  Sundaram  and  Dr.  Abhishek
Manu Singhvi, that it is not open for the State  Government  to  appoint  an
Enquiry Officer in exercise of its power under Section  14(4)  of  the  Act,
with a direction to him to reopen the cases in relation to the  holdings  of
land of the Company share holders and its sub-leases after 12 years  of  the
proceedings in the ceiling matters under the Act  were  concluded  on  merit
and the same attained finality. It is further urged by them that  the  State
Government could not have suo motu exercised its power  beyond   the  period
of three years limitation prescribed under  Section  45(2)  of  the  Act  to
reopen the cases and revise  the  orders  passed  in  the  ceiling  matters,
which proceedings have attained finality. The orders passed in  the  appeals
in the ceiling proceedings have  attained  finality,  the  State  Government
could not have  exercised  its  suo-motu  power  to  call  for  the  records
pertaining to the land holdings of the appellants as  the  period  of  three
years limitation stipulated in the above provision was over  from  the  date
of the orders passed under Section 21 by the Tehsildar who was  the  Revenue
Officer  in  the  land  ceiling  matters  and  those  orders  have  attained
finality.  Therefore, it is urged that the exercise of power  by  the  State
Government under Section 14(4) of the Act, appointing   an  Enquiry  Officer
to enquire into the land holdings of the  Company  share  holders  and  sub-
leases on the alleged ground that the share holders have created  sub-leases
in respect of their holdings of land  by  fabricating  the  revenue  records
against  whom  criminal  cases  were  registered  and  were  convicted   and
sentenced  them  for  the  charges  by  the  Special  Judge  and  in   which
proceedings, the Company and the share holders who are not the  parties  and
other  appellants  in  respect  of  civil  appeals,  who   were   subsequent
purchasers of the land from  the  share  holders,  and  they  have  acquired
constitutional right upon their land holdings  under  Article  300A  of  the
Constitution of India and therefore, it is totally impermissible in law  for
the State Government to pass the impugned  order  as  the  same  is  without
jurisdiction for the reason that Section 45 (2) of  the  Act,  only  confers
power upon it to exercise its suo motu revisional power within  three  years
from the date of passing of the orders in the land ceiling cases and  orders
passed  in  the  appeals  and  call  for  the  records  in  the   revisional
proceedings  to examine the proprietory of such orders passed  in  the  land
ceiling proceedings of  the  land  under  Section  21  of  the  Act  on  the
declaration made  by the holders of the land under Section  6  of  the  Act,
declaring that the declarants do not own the surplus lands  under  the  Act,
which orders were the subject matter of  appeals  at  the  instance  of  the
State Government and its officers before the  appellate  authority  and  the
same came to be  dismissed  on  merits  by  the  appellate  authority  after
hearing them and the said judgments and orders have  attained  finality  and
the State Government has not chosen to  exercise  its  suo  motu  revisional
power under Section 45(2) of the Act within the stipulated period  of  three
years. It is further urged by the learned  senior  counsel  that  the  State
Government has no statutory  power  either  under  Section  45(2)  or  under
Section 14(4) of the Act to enquire into the  very  same  subject-matter  of
the land holdings of the share holders, sub-lessees and  the  purchasers  of
the land under the guise of  exercise  of  its  statutory  power  under  the
provisions of the Act, by  appointing  an  officer  to  conduct  enquiry  in
relation to the land in question with reference to the  revenue  records  of
the land of the villages referred to supra.

9.   The learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the  appellants  have
also further contended that the order passed  by  the  State  Government  is
without jurisdiction and the same is passed without  giving  an  opportunity
to the appellants, which is not only in violation  of  statutory  provisions
of the Act, but also principles of natural justice  as  its  action  entails
serious civil  consequences  upon  the  rights  accrued  in  favour  of  the
appellants of the land in question. Further, it is urged by  them  that  the
said orders are arbitrary, unreasonable and  violative  of  the  Fundamental
Rights guaranteed to the appellants under Articles 14, 19 and  21  and  also
the constitutional right under Article 300A of the Constitution of India  in
relation to the land holdings. The learned Division Bench of the High  Court
ought to have accepted the legal contentions urged before it in exercise  of
its extraordinary writ jurisdiction under Article 226  of  the  Constitution
of India and the impugned order should have been quashed as prayed  by  them
but, on the other hand, it dismissed  the  writ  petitions  by  passing  the
common judgment and order which is under challenge in these  appeals,  which
are required to be  interfered  with  by  this  Court  in  exercise  of  its
appellate jurisdiction under Article 136 of the  Constitution  of  India  as
there will be miscarriage of justice, if the impugned  common  judgment  and
order is not set aside and quash the order passed by the  State  Government.
Therefore, the learned senior counsel on behalf of the appellants  requested
this Court to allow the appeals and set  aside  the  impugned  judgment  and
order and quash the government order  impugned  in  the  writ  petitions  by
allowing these appeals.

10.  The learned senior counsel Mr. Shekhar Naphade appearing on  behalf  of
the private respondents/land owners at whose  instance  the  criminal  cases
were registered against the accused persons  on  their  representation,  the
State Government has passed the impugned order. He has  submitted  that  the
Company has taken nearly about 5000 acres of the land from  its  owners  and
purchased 1500 acres of land in  different  villages  in  Maharashtra  State
viz. Akluj, Bijwadi, Tambave and Mahlung in Malshiras Taluka and  that  land
has been wrongfully retained by  the  Company,  share  holders  and  the  so
called sub lessees by giving false declarations under the provisions of  the
Act on the basis of the fabricated land revenue record in  relation  to  the
land involved in these cases.

11.  He further submits that as per the provisions of the Land Ceiling  Act,
the ceiling limit  of  holding  of  land  by  one  person  is  18  acres  of
agricultural wet land.   The  undisputed  fact  is  that  the  land  holding
tenants were 125 as on the date when the Act came into force.  The same  has
been illegally increased to 384 sub-leases to circumvent the  provisions  of
the Act by playing  fraud  on  the  competent  revenue  authorities  by  the
declarants by fabricating and creating land revenue records of the  land  in
collusion with the Revenue  Officers  contrary  to  the  provisions  of  the
Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966, with a view to make wrongful  gains  of
the land holdings by themselves.  Criminal  cases  were  registered  against
them for different offences.  After  the trial in the criminal  cases,  they
were convicted and sentenced for the charges  leveled  against  them,  which
proceedings have become final. Therefore, he submits that it is a big  fraud
played by the declarants on the  revenue  officers  of  the  above  referred
Districts with a view to defraud the owners of  the  land  with  an  oblique
motive to come  out  from  the  clutches  of  the  land  ceiling  under  the
provisions of the Act, thereby they have illegally deprived the land  owners
rights to re-own the land. At the instance of the land owners, the  impugned
order is passed by the State Government who will  be  the  beneficiaries  if
the land holdings of the  appellants  are  declared  as  surplus  after  the
enquiry is conducted by the Enquiry Officer, as they would  get  their  land
back under the provisions of the Act. Therefore, the learned senior  counsel
submits that the orders of  the  land  ceiling  proceedings  passed  by  the
competent authorities under  Section  21  of  the  Act,  in  favour  of  the
declarants are also  erroneously  affirmed  in  the  appellate  proceedings,
those orders are all tainted with fraud played by them  and  therefore,  the
same cannot be allowed to sustain in law. It is further contended  that  the
factual and legal pleas urged by the learned senior  counsel  on  behalf  of
the appellants that suo motu exercise  of  power  by  the  State  Government
under Section 45(2) of the Act cannot be  exercised  at  the  belated  stage
after the land ceiling proceedings in respect  of  the  land  of  the  above
villages have attained finality, are wholly untenable in law for the  reason
that the fraud unravels everything and therefore, there cannot be a bar  for
the State Government to exercise its power on the ground of  limitation  for
initiating the proceedings in respect of the land involved  in  these  cases
in the public interest. It is further urged by  him  that  the  exercise  of
power by the State Government under Section  14(4)  of  the  Act  cannot  be
termed as illegal having regard to the magnitude of the fraud played by  the
declarants  in respect of huge extent  of  agricultural  wet  land  to  save
themselves from the clutches of the Land Ceiling Act to an  extent  of  3000
and odd acres of land which amounts to deprivation of the land  holdings  of
the land owners, who have leased their land in favour  of  the  Company  and
they are entitled to get their land back after  declaring  the  holdings  of
the appellants as surplus after conducting an enquiry and  if  it  is  found
the orders passed in favour of the  declarants  are  illegal  as  they  have
played fraud on the officers, which will be  the  valuable  fundamental  and
statutory rights conferred upon the land owners, who are  the  beneficiaries
and in such an eventuality the Fundamental Rights that would be  accrued  in
their favour under Articles 19(1)(g) and 21(1) of the Constitution of  India
read with Section 21 of the Act, have been illegally deprived of by them  by
indulging in fraudulent acts.    It  is  contended  that  the  plea  of  the
appellants that the exercise of power by the  State  Government  in  passing
the order under Section 14 (4) of the Act at no stretch of  imagination  can
be termed as illegal for want of jurisdiction  on  the  ground  that  it  is
barred by limitation, and therefore, he submits that the appeals are  liable
to be rejected as they are devoid of merit.

12.  He has also further placed  strong  reliance  upon  the  provisions  of
Sections 147 and 148 of Land Revenue  Code,  which  provisions  mandate  the
Revenue Officer to maintain land revenue  records  truly  and  correctly  in
relation to holding of the land by the declarants. Section 150 of  the  Land
Revenue Code provides for making  entries  of  mutations  and  register  the
disputed cases by the concerned Revenue Officers. Section 296  of  the  Code
provides that notice of transfer of title of land  etc.  in  favour  of  the
transferee shall be given to the District Collector which has not been  done
in the instant case.

13.  The learned senior  counsel  on  behalf  of  the  land  owners  in  the
alternative has further submitted to justify  the  impugned  orders  in  the
writ petitions which are not rightly interfered with by the  High  Court  in
exercise of its  extraordinary  writ  jurisdiction  by  passing  the  common
impugned judgment and order, based  on  certain  relevant  facts  and  legal
contentions. Further, he would submit that the said order can  be  traceable
to the executive power exercised by the State Government under  Article  162
of the Constitution of India in the larger interest  of  public.  The  legal
contention urged on behalf of the appellants that the exercise of  statutory
power by the State Government under Section 14(4) of the Act is bad  in  law
is wholly untenable  in  law  and  therefore,  the  same  is  liable  to  be
rejected.  The learned senior counsel Mr. Naphade  submits  that  the  above
untenable contentions urged on behalf of the appellants  are  liable  to  be
rejected, particularly, having regard to the fact that huge extent  of  land
acquired by the share holders and fictitious sub-leases by  fabricating  and
creating the revenue records  of  the  land  in  question  to  overcome  the
ceiling limits of holdings of land, which are  criminal  offences  committed
by the declarants under the Indian Penal Code for which some of the  accused
share holders of the Company and others involved in the criminal cases  were
charged for the criminal offences committed by them and have been  convicted
and sentenced for the proved charges framed against them. Therefore,  it  is
contended  by  him  that  the  impugned  judgment  and  order  need  not  be
interfered with by this Court in exercise of its appellate jurisdiction.

14.  The purpose of the orders issued by the State Government is to  conduct
the administrative enquiry  by  the  Enquiry  Officer  appointed  by  it  in
relation to  the  revenue  records  of  the  land  in  question,  which  are
fabricated after destroying the original revenue records,  with  a  view  to
make unlawful enrichment by the declarants and therefore the same has to  be
examined by the Enquiry Officer after going through the correctness  of  the
entries in  the  relevant  revenue  records  pertaining  to  the  land  with
reference to the provisions of Land Revenue Code  and he can  find  out  the
modus operandi adopted by the share holders of the Company in creating  sub-
leases in respect of the land in favour  of  384  persons  to  overcome  the
ceiling provisions of the  Act,  so  as  not  to  get  their  land  holdings
declared as surplus by  creating  the  alleged  fictitious  entries  in  the
revenue records  without following provisions of the Land Revenue  Code  and
destroying the original revenue records. The same cannot be objected  to  by
the appellants, at this stage as their rights are not  affected  and  it  is
premature to examine their claims as has been urged in the  proceedings  and
there are no civil consequences upon them.

15.  The other untenable contention urged on behalf of the  appellants  that
the appellants have not been heard before passing the impugned order by  the
High Court and their statutory right and fundamental  rights  acquired  upon
the lands in question are deprived, is wholly  imaginary  and  there  is  no
merit in this regard.  The learned senior  counsel  placed  strong  reliance
upon the constitution bench Judgment of this Court in the case of  State  of
West Bengal vs. Committee for Protection of Democratic Rights,  West  Bengal
and Ors.[1] in support of his  above  submission  to  justify  the  impugned
judgment and order wherein this  Court  in  exercise  of  its  extraordinary
power under Article 142 of the Constitution, being the conscience keeper  of
the society, has laid down the law holding that the CBI can investigate  the
criminal case in any State without their consent in the larger  interest  of
the parties.  In view of the law laid down by this Court in the above  case,
this Court need not exercise its appellate jurisdiction in a matter of  this
nature as no adverse order are passed by the State  Government  against  the
appellants at this stage, and it is only stated in the impugned  order  that
enquiry will be conducted by the Deputy Commissioner  of  Pune  Division  in
respect of the land holding of the declarants.

16.   The learned counsel  on  behalf  of  the  State  Government  has  also
justified the impugned judgment and order contending that the same  is  well
reasoned order and he has also adopted the submission made  by  the  learned
senior counsel on behalf of the owners Mr. Shekar  Naphade  who  had  leased
their lands to the Company.

17. We have carefully examined  the  rival  factual  and  legal  contentions
urged on behalf of the parties with a view to find out  as  to  whether  the
common impugned judgment and order warrants interference in  these  appeals.
After careful perusal of the judgment passed in  the  criminal  appeals,  we
noticed that some of the appellants were convicted  and  sentenced  for  the
offences punishable under Sections 466, 468, 471, 477A, 120B and 109 of  the
IPC, in relation to the offences committed by them in respect  of  the  land
holdings. In the backdrop of the  judgment  passed  in  the  criminal  cases
referred to supra which have attained finality before this Court, the  State
Government, after examining the representations given by the land owners  in
these cases with reference to the relevant land records of the land  holders
of the villages, has rightly exercised its  statutory  power  by  appointing
the Sub-Divisional Officer as an Enquiry Officer at the first  instance  and
later on Deputy Commissioner of Pune  was  appointed  to  enquire  into  the
matter which is in the larger public interest.

18. The said order is passed by the State Government only  to  enquire  into
the land holding records with a view to find  out  as  to  whether  original
land revenue records have been  destroyed  and  fabricated  to  substantiate
their unjustifiable claim by playing fraud upon the Tehsildar and  appellate
authorities to obtain the orders unlawfully in their favour by showing  that
there is no surplus land with the Company  and  its  share  holders  as  the
valid sub-leases are made and they are accepted by them in  the  proceedings
under Section 21 of the Act, on the basis of the alleged false  declarations
filed by the share holders and sub-lessees under Section 6 of the  Act.  The
plea urged on behalf of the State Government and the de-facto  complainants-
owners, at whose instance the orders are passed by the State  Government  on
the alleged ground of fraud played by the declarants upon the Tehsildar  and
appellate authorities to get the illegal orders obtained  by  them  to  come
out from the clutches of the land ceiling provisions of the Act by  creating
the revenue records, which  is  the  fraudulent  act  on  their  part  which
unravels everything and therefore, the  question  of  limitation  under  the
provisions to exercise power by the State Government does not arise at  all.
For this purpose, the Deputy Commissioner of Pune Division was appointed  as
the Enquiry Officer to hold such an enquiry to enquire into the  matter  and
submit his report for  consideration  of  the  Government  to  take  further
action in the matter.  The  legal  contentions  urged  by  Mr.  Naphade,  in
justification of the impugned judgment and order prima facie at this  stage,
we are satisfied that the allegation of fraud in  relation  to  getting  the
land holdings of the villages referred to supra by  the  declarants  on  the
alleged ground  of  destroying  original  revenue  records  and  fabricating
revenue records to show that there are 384 sub-leases of the  land  involved
in the proceedings to retain the surplus land illegally as alleged,  to  the
extent of more  than  3000  acres  of  land  and  the  orders  are  obtained
unlawfully by the declarants in the land ceiling limits will be  nullity  in
the eye of law though such orders have attained finality, if it is found  in
the enquiry by the Enquiry Officer that they are  tainted  with  fraud,  the
same can be interfered with by the State  Government  and  its  officers  to
pass appropriate orders. The land  owners  are  also  aggrieved  parties  to
agitate their rights to get the orders which are obtained by the  declarants
 as they  are  vitiated  in  law  on  account  of  nullity  is  the  tenable
submission and the same  is  well  founded  and  therefore,  we  accept  the
submission to justify the impugned judgment and order of the Division  Bench
of the High Court.

19.   The legal submissions made by the learned senior counsel on behalf  of
the appellants that the State Government has no power either  under  Section
45(2)  or under Section 14 (4) of the Act to appoint an Enquiry  Officer  to
enquire into the land holdings of  the  villages  referred  to  therein  are
untenable contentions of the appellants which have been rightly rebutted  by
the learned senior counsel Mr. Shekhar  Naphade  by  urging  an  alternative
legal plea that the power exercised by the  State  Government  to  pass  the
orders impugned in the writ petitions is traceable to  its  executive  power
under Article 162 of the Constitution of India. Hence,  the  same  shall  be
accepted by us and the said provision is extracted hereunder:
"162. Extent of executive power of State Subject to the provisions  of  this
Constitution, the executive power of a State shall  extend  to  the  matters
with respect to which the Legislature of the State has power  to  make  laws
Provided that in any matter with respect  to  which  the  Legislature  of  a
State and Parliament have power to make laws, the  executive  power  of  the
State shall be subject to, and limited by,  the  executive  power  expressly
conferred by the Constitution or by any law  made  by  Parliament  upon  the
Union or authorities thereof Council of Ministers."

20. The submission made by the learned senior counsel  Mr.  Shekhar  Naphade
that having regard to the magnitude of the alleged fraud creating  384  sub-
leases illegally in place of 125  sub-leases  in  respect  of  the  land  in
question to defraud the State Government and the owners of the land who  had
leased originally in favour of the Company with  a  view  to  see  that  the
share holders, sub-lessees to  come  out  from  the  clutches  of  the  land
ceiling provisions of the Act in respect  of  the  land  involved  in  these
proceedings with a view to deprive the legitimate statutory  rights  of  the
original owners of the land, who have leased  the  land  in  favour  of  the
Company  to  run  its  factory  to  manufacture  sugar,  who  will  be   the
beneficiaries of the surplus land, if their holdings which leased in  favour
of the Company and its share  holders  is  declared  as  surplus  under  the
provisions of the Act  after conducting an enquiry by the  Enquiry  Officer,
is the most tenable contention urged by Mr. Shekhar Nahpade  and  therefore,
the same must be  accepted  by  this  Court.  He  has  also  rightly  placed
reliance upon the constitution bench judgment  of  this  Court  referred  to
supra, which decision shall be  applied  to  the  fact  situation  of  these
appeals. The learned senior counsel Mr. Naphade has rightly relied upon  the
above referred case to invite  our  attention  that  this  Court  shall  not
interfere with the orders passed by the State  Government  or  the  impugned
judgment and order of the High Court in upholding the orders  of  the  State
Government as the same is passed by it keeping in view the  larger  interest
of the public having regard to the criminality proved against  some  of  the
share  holders,  who  were  the  accused  persons  in  the  criminal   cases
instituted against them.  We are satisfied with the submission made  by  the
learned senior counsel on behalf of the de facto complaints  at  this  stage
as the same is tenable and well founded  and  public  interest  involved  in
this case.

21.  The apprehension in the mind of the appellants  that  their  statutory,
fundamental and constitutional rights guaranteed  under  the  provisions  of
the Act and Articles 14, 19 and 21 read with 300A  of  the  Constitution  of
India are infringed at this stage is premature and misconceived.  Therefore,
the question of issuing notices to  them  by  the  State  Government  before
passing the orders in appointing  the  Deputy  Commissioner  as  an  Enquiry
Officer to conduct administrative enquiry in relation to the  land  holdings
of the land of the Company, the share holders and the appellants  herein  to
find out whether the land revenue  records  of  the  land  of  the  villages
referred to supra are destroyed and fabricated on that basis the  declarants
have declared that they do not own surplus land, the  State  Government  has
not passed effective orders at this stage to take away the  valuable  rights
of the appellants as claimed by them and therefore, the question  of  giving
opportunity to them at this stage and conducting enquiry before passing  the
orders is wholly untenable in law, as the orders   are  only  administrative
in nature by appointing an officer to enquire into the alleged fraud on  the
officers, who have decided the declarations of the share  holders  and  sub-
lessees favourably on the basis of fabricated revenue records by  destroying
original records of the  land  of  villages  referred  to  supra,  with  the
deliberate intention to come out from the clutches of  the  Act.  Therefore,
the rights of the appellants are not affected on the date of passing of  the
orders by the State Government. Therefore,  the  contentions  urged  by  the
learned senior counsel on behalf of the appellants  referred  to  supra  are
wholly untenable and the same are liable  to  be  rejected  and  accordingly
rejected.

22.  For the reasons stated supra we do not want to go into  the  merits  of
the case. Apart from the said reasons, we have  very  carefully  scrutinized
the impugned common judgment and order of the High Court and the  orders  of
the State Government and we do not find any reason whatsoever  to  interfere
with the same as none of the  legal  contentions  urged  on  behalf  of  the
appellants have got any merit consideration.  In our  considered  view,  the
orders impugned in the writ petitions which are affirmed by the High  Court,
are perfectly legal and  valid  and  therefore,  the  same  do  not  warrant
interference by this Court in exercise of power of this Court under  Article
136 of the Constitution, but on the other hand, the aforesaid orders of  the
State Government can also be traceable  to  executive  power  of  the  State
Government under Article 162 of the Constitution of India having  regard  to
the magnitude of the alleged fraud in relation to the  vast  extent  of  the
land holding obtained by the declarants by giving false declarations with  a
view to come out from the clutches of the land  ceiling  provisions  of  the
Act, which is the prima facie view taken by the  State  Government  and  the
same cannot be found fault with by this Court in these proceedings  at  this
stage.

23.  It is noticed by this Court that right from the year 1989,  the  orders
passed by the  State  Government  have  been  successfully  stalled  by  the
appellants to conduct the administrative enquiry into  the  matter  for  the
last quarter century, the most valuable period is lost  in  the  process  of
untenable litigation made by the appellants. Therefore, we direct the  State
Government and the Enquiry Officer appointed for the purpose or if the  said
Officer has already retired,  then  the  Deputy  Commissioner  of  the  Pune
Division  who  is  in  office  at  present  is  required  to  expedite   the
administrative enquiry within six months as directed by the  High  Court  in
its operative portion of the order or any officer can be  appointed  by  the
State Government in his place within two weeks from the date of  receipt  of
this order and submit compliance report to this Court for  its  perusal  and
further  direct  the  State  Government  to  proceed  with  the  matter   in
accordance with law after affording opportunity to all the parties.

      For the foregoing reasons, the impugned  judgment  and  order  of  the
Division Bench in affirming the  orders  of  the  State  Government  is  not
required to be interfered with for one more reason, namely, the High  Court,
after adverting to certain findings recorded  in  the  criminal  cases  with
regard to the land ceiling and on the alleged fraud against  the  declarants
in getting the orders passed under Section 21 of the Act, has  recorded  the
findings and reasons holding that the orders of the State Government do  not
warrant interference as the same are in the interest of public at large.

      In view of the foregoing  reasons,  the  appeals  are  dismissed  with
costs of Rs.50,000/- to be paid by the appellants in each of  these  appeals
out of which 50% to be given to the State  Government  of  Maharashtra,  and
the remaining 50% to be given  to  the  contesting  private  respondents  at
whose instance the orders were passed by the State Government.  The  parties
are directed to maintain status quo regarding the nature of land and not  to
create any encumbrance upon the land involved in these proceedings till  the
enquiry is over.

    ............................................................J.
                           [V. GOPALA GOWDA]


............................................................J.
                              [C. NAGAPPAN]

New Delhi,                                            February 11, 2015

-----------------------
[1]    (2010) 3 SCC 571