LAND LAW (SEM-09/PAPER-01)

LW 5015

SELF – NOTES

Anish Mahapatra

BBA LLB “A”

Roll No. – 1782019

MODULE 1: INTRODUCTION TO THE LAND LAWS

CONCEPT OF EMINENT DOMAIN

The concept of eminent domain comes from the general overview which means the supreme
power of the government under which the property of a person can be taken for interest of
general public. Therefore taking over the property by the king or the government has been made
possible only after compensating the land owner of such property. Thus eminent domain
explained as the power of the king or the government to take over the property of a private
person when it is needed for a public purpose. Doctrine of ‘eminent domain’ is based on two
maxims namely salus populi supreme lex esto which means that the welfare of the people is the
paramount law and necessita public major est quan, which means that public necessity is greater
than the private necessity. The expression “eminent domain” means permanent (eminent)
dominion (domain) of the state on the property. The power of the State to take private property
for public use and consequent right of the owner to compensate now emerge from the
constitution of India.

CONSTITUTIONAL MANIFESTATION OF EMINENT DOMAIN

The Constitution in its original un-amended form guaranteed the right to property as a
fundamental right. Article 19(l)(f) existed in the Constitution of India which gave a modicum of
protection to private property Article 31 makes the property right more stronger by putting
constitutional restraint against State i.e., State shall not deprive the property right of individual
unless saved by authority of law. These Articles were repealed by the forty fourth constitutional
amendment and Article 300A inserted. This move has to a great extent diluted the Constitutional
protection to the institution of private property in India.

RIGHT TO PROPERTY UNDER THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA: AN ANALYSIS

However, only a definition of Constitutional property is common in all democratic countries.

Since state exercises eminent domain power against private property, it is pertinent to discuss the
concept of private property in brief. The institution of private property has been a controversial
issue with conflicting views, one completely denying the right to own private property and the
other supports the holding of the private property. However, the right to property is a natural and
inherent right of an individual. The aim of the private law is to regulate relationships between
individuals, therefore, definition of property in private law depends on the different aspects of
the legal relations among individuals, but aim of constitutional law is to regulate relationship
between individual and state, therefore, state protects the property right of individuals. For
example, Fifth Amendment to US Constitution does not provide that “nor shall any state deprive
any person life, liberty, property, without due process of law”.

It is an Indian judicial principle developed by judges by analyzing various cases. There are some
basic features of constitution of India which cannot be amended because they are most crucial
part of the constitution. Justice Khanna has explained Fundamental Rights as the key features
which are granted to all the citizen of our country. Before proposition of Basic structure any part
of the Constitution including the fundamental rights was amendable by parliament through
Article 368. Art.31-B and Ninth Schedule that were added through (First Constitutional
Amendment) Act, 1951 are the main root cause for developing this doctrine by the Judiciary in
so many cases because the said amendment was violating the right to property which was the
fundamental right of the people.

That the Constitution has "basic features" was first theorized in 1964, by Justice J.R. Mudholkar
in his dissent, in the case of Sajjan Singh v. State of Rajasthan. He wrote, It is also a matter for
consideration whether making a change in a basic feature of the Constitution can be regarded
merely as an amendment or would it be, in effect, rewriting a part of the Constitution; and if the
latter, would it be within the purview of Article 368? The landmark judgements of the Supreme
Court of India regarding the basic structure doctrine of the Indian Constitution are as under:

Shankari Prasad vs. Union of India

Facts and arguments raised in the case: After independence the government of India applied
various agrarian reforms which were challenging the fundamental rights of the people and
especially the Right to Property and because of that it was challenged in many High Courts. The
first enactment on agrarian reform was the Bihar Land Reforms Act, 1950 which was later on
challenged in Patna High Court. So to immunize this law and to nullify the judgements of High
Courts the First constitutional Amendment Act was introduced. In this case (First Constitutional
Amendment) Act, 1951 was challenged. Through this amendment act certain laws were brought
which were curtailing right to property. By this amendment act A31-A and A31-B was added. In
this case the argument which was put forward that as per article 13, no law can infringe or
abrogate fundamental rights so how can the constitutional amendment can violate it?

Judgement: The Supreme Court upheld the validity of the first amendment of the Constitution.
It also held that Article 13 cannot overtake Article 368 because Article 13 which is the protector
of the fundamental rights, in this article the world law is used which indicates only ordinary
laws. It means law is exercising only legislative powers and not the constitutional authority. The
Supreme Court had clearly drawn the line of distinction between ordinary law and constitutional
amendment. The scope of Article 13 is restricted to ordinary law whereas the scope of
Harmonious Constitution was used so as to remove the conflict between Article 13 and Article
368. As per the said principle when any conflict arises between the two articles then one article is
restricted in comparison to another. So finally it was held that the parliament has power to
amend any fundamental right under the Article 368

Sajjan Singh vs. State of Rajasthan

Facts and arguments raised in the case: In this case (Seventeenth Constitutional Amendment)
Act, 1964 was challenged. Again the question of Shankari Prasad Case was raised whether the
fundamental rights can be amended or not. The Ninth Schedule consist of certain statutes relating
to the property and the specialty of the Ninth schedule was that it is not subject to judicial
review and because of that right to judicial review was taken away which is one of the basic
features of the constitution. The principle of Pith and Substance was applied to this case.

Judgement: The Supreme Court held that the article 368 empowers the Parliament to amend any
of the articles of the Indian Constitution. Once again it was said that the Article 13 is just limited
to the ordinary laws not with the constitutional amendment whereas the scope of article 368 is
limited to constitutional law. Among the 5 judge bench, 2 judge given a dissenting judgement –
Mudholkar and Hidayatulah. Justice Mudholkar was of the opinion that fundamental features of
the Constitution cannot be changed. According to him each and every constitution of the world
has certain fundamental features. Such features must not be changed. He was of the opinion that
fundamental features of the Constitution of India cannot be changed. Thus, Justice Hidayatullahb
was of the opinion about making no alterations in the basic features of the Indian Constitution.
But according to the majority decision it was said that parliament can amend fundamental rights
of the people.

L.C Golaknath vs. State of Punjab & Haryana

Facts and arguments rose in the case: Again (Seventeenth Constitutional Amendment) Act,
1963 was challenged. The question which was raise whether the power to amend the constitution
is limited or unlimited, basically the whole scope was also challenged in this case. Until this case
we had a position that Article 368 has more power than Article 13 but Article 368 is subject to
the limitation of judicial review. Supreme Court went ahead and also said that parliament does
not have any power to amend or abridge the fundamental right in the way of the amendment and
because of that no change can be made in fundamental rights in future. Further the ambit of
Article 13(2) was discusses that the word law used under Article 13(2) includes amendment and
if any amendment violates fundamental right it would be void.

Judgement: The majority of justices in the said petition overruled the judgements given in
Shankari Prasad case and Sajjan Singh Case but out of eleven judge bench, five justices were
dissenting. In both of these previous cases Supreme Court had held that we can make
amendments in the fundamental rights but in this present case majority of the judges considered
fundamental rights as transcendental. It is also expressed by the Supreme Court that if parliament
will get the power to amend the fundamental right then a time will also come when there will be
no fundamental rights of the people. Justice Hidayatullah also expressed his views by proposing
a separate judgment in which he says that because of Article 13, parliament does not have power
to amend the fundamental rights and he said that article 13 covers not only legislative
amendments but constitutional amendments also. So finally it was held that fundamental rights
are the fundamental needs of the people and parliament cannot amend it and it is necessary to
protect them.

Kesavananda Bharti vs. State of Kerala

Facts and arguments raised in the case: In this case the Constitution Twenty-third
Amendment Act and Twenty-fourth Amendment Act were challenged before Supreme Court of
India. Twenty-fourth Amendment Act amendment act seeks to amend Article 13 of the
constitution to make it inapplicable to any amendment of the constitution under article 368.
Nothing in the Article 13 shall affect the amending power of the Article 368. So basically the
question which was raised in this case that does parliament have power to abridge the
fundamental rights of the people by the means of Article 368?

Judgement: It was held that provision pertaining to the amendment of the Constitution is the
characteristic or most important aspect of the modern Constitutions of the World. Each judge
laid out separately, what they thought were the basic or essential features of the Constitution.
There was no unanimity of opinion within the majority view either. According to Justice S.M.
Sikri, there are some basic features of the Indian Constitution that cannot be changed under
Article 368 which are as follows:

 Supremacy of the Constitution

 Republican and democratic form of the government
 Secular character of the Constitution
 Separation of powers between the legislature, the executive and the judiciary
 Federal character of the Constitution

According to Justice Sikri, the Parliament has power amend any article of the Constitution
except the basic structure of the Constitution. Hegde, J. and Mukherjea, J. proposed a separate
and shorter list of basic features:

 Sovereignty of India
 Democratic character of the polity
 Unity of the country
 Essential features of the individual freedoms secured to the citizens
 Mandate to build a welfare state

The Kesavananda Bharati case upheld the validity of the Twenty-fourth amendment saying that
Parliament had the power to amend any or all provisions of the Constitution. Further the Court
also held that certain key words in the Preamble formed part of the basic structure of the
Constitution and declared that this basic structure was inviolable thereby casting a limitation to
Parliament’s power to amend the Constitution of article 368 is restricted to constitutional
amendments made by the Parliament.
Indira Nehru Gandhi vs. Raj Narain

Facts and arguments raised in the case: In the elections of Rae Bareilly in Uttar Pradesh Raj
Narain was the leader of Ram Manohar Lohia’s SSP who stood against Indira Gandhi. Raj
Narain was very confident of his victory and when he loses from Indira Gandhi he filed a
petition in Allahabad High Court challenging the Prime Minister’s elections on violating election
code under the Representation of the People Act of 1951. Allahabad High Court declared the
elections as void on the ground of corrupt practices and at that time Supreme Court was also not
in working and that’s why she was granted a conditional stay. After that she imposes a national
emergency and introduced Article 329A to the constitution of India. According to the Article
329A election of the prime minister and the speaker cannot be questioned and because of this
reason it was challenged.

Judgement: Supreme Court applied the concept of Basic Structure which was given in the
Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala. It expressed that Clause (4) of Article 329-A needed to
be struck down on the ground that it hampers the standards of free and fair elections which is a
piece of the basic structure of the Constitution. So the apex court upheld the contentions raised
by the Raj Narain and Clause (4) of Article 329-A was declared unconstitutional. It was said by
Mathew J. “a healthy democracy can only function when there is the possibility of free and fair
elections” and this amendment destroyed this possibility and therefore violated the basic
structure of the constitution. So finally 39th (Amendment) Act, 1975 was struck down because it
violates the basic structure of the constitution.

Minerva Mills Ltd., Bangalore vs. Union of India

Facts and arguments raised in the case: In this case the Constitution (Forty-Second Amendment)
Act, 1976 was challenged. By this amendment act clause 4 and 5 brought in Article 368.
Through this amendment most widespread changes to the Constitution and also to the Preamble
and because of that it is sometimes called as a "mini-Constitution". The Forty-Second
Amendment also leads to the addition of some new articles and sections. By this amendment
parliament was given unrestrained power to amend any parts of the Constitution, without any
judicial review. It transferred more power from the state governments to the central government,
eroding India's federal structure. It changes the words "unity of the nation" to "unity and integrity
of the nation" and the description of India from “sovereign democratic republic” to a “sovereign,
socialist secular democratic republic”

BACKGROUND O F LAND TENURE

In Orissa, various types of the system of land tenure are found in the villages. The choice of one
or more forms of land tenure by a definite area is basically the outcome of time-honoured
convention. There are broadly three types of tenancy found in Orissa. The three broad types of
tenurial contract consist of crop sharing tenancy, cost sharing tenancy and fixed rent tenancy. As
per the system of crop sharing tenancy the gross produce of the land is divided between landlords
and tenants in the ratio 1:1. The tenancy system in Orissa is the system of land mortgaging was
also in practice. Since land is the only asset in the rural Orissa people used to mortgage their land
and take loan for personal and other unproductive conventional purposes. Under this system of
land tenure land is kept as collateral for securing personal loans from the' landlords. In this case
the owner of the land which is mortgaged becomes a tenant and pays the rent to the landlord till
the loan is paid fully. Land is considered as the most desired form of collateral security.
Accordingly tenants used to mortgage their land to get loans. In case of failure to repay the loan,
the land will be under the cultivation and ownership of the landlords.

Land Tenures under British Rule: Under British Rule, there were three main types of land
tenure systems in India. They were Zamindars, Mahalwari and Rayatwari. Zamindari: Introduced
by Lord Cornwallis in Bengal in 1786 Lands of a village or few villages was held by one person
or few joint owners who were responsible for payment of land revenue to the Government.
There used to be number of intermediaries between the Zamindars and the actual tillers of the
soil. The system took were various forms such as Zamindari, Jagirdari, Inamdari, etc. In many
cases revenue collectors were raised to the status of land owners. This system was introduced in
many parts of the country. In this system, tillers of the soil were exploited by way of exorbitant
rents. There were no incentives for them to improve the land or to use better cultivation
practices. There were many other social evils of the system. It is said that the British introduced
Zamindari system to achieve two objectives. First, it helped in regular collection of land revenue
from a few persons i.e. Zamindars. Secondly, it created a class of people who would remain loyal
to the British ruler in the country. Mahalwari: the village lands were held jointly by the village
communities, the members of which were jointly and severally responsible for the payment of
land revenue. Land revenue was fixed for the whole village and the village headman
(Lumberdar) collected it for which he received ‘Panchatra’ i.e. 5 per cent as commission.
Rayatwari: Introduced by Sir Thomas Munro first in Madras state and then in Bombay State. In
this system, there was a direct relationship between Government and the tenant or Rayat i.e.
individual land holder. Every registered holder was recognized as its proprietor and he could sell
or transfer the land. He was assured of permanent tenure as long as he paid the land revenue. The
land holder was also allowed to sublet his land. It was a better system as compared to Zamindari
or Mahalwari and similar other forms of tenure.

LAND TENURE OF ODISHA

The state of Orissa was formed on 1.4.1936. Prior to 1936 the district of Cuttack, Puri, Balasore,
Sambalpur and Angul formed the “Orissa Division of the Province of Bihar and Orissa”. In
Orissa, various types of the system of land tenure are found in the villages. There are broadly
three types of tenancy found in Orissa. The three broad types of tenurial contract consist of crop
sharing tenancy, cost sharing tenancy and fixed rent tenancy. As per the system of crop sharing
tenancy the gross produce of the land is divided between landlords and tenants in the ratio 1:1. In
some part of Orissa, particularly in the western Orissa, the output to be shared between landlords
and tenants is computed less of the cost of cultivation which includes the expenditure of
fertilizers, pesticides and water borne by the tenants. Under the system of cost sharing tenancy,
the cost of cultivation is partly borne by the landlords and partly by the tenants. After bearing the
cost of cultivation as per contract, the gross produce is shared between them in the ratio 1:1. In
case of fixed rent tenancy, the tenants pay a fixed rent for one agricultural year as decided or
contracted between the landlords and the tenants. Sometimes such contracts are extended and
spread over more than one agricultural year Apart from these three usual forms of tenancy in
Orissa the system of land mortgaging was also in practice. Since land is the only asset in the
rural Orissa people used to mortgage their land and take loan for personal and other unproductive
conventional purposes. Under this system of land tenure land is kept as collateral for securing
personal loans from the' landlords. In this case the owner of the land which is mortgaged
becomes a tenant and pays the rent to the landlord till the loan is paid fully. Land is considered as
the most desired form of collateral security.
LAND REFORMS IN ODISHA

In the United Nations resolutions and reports, land reform is treated as a reform in institutional
arrangements in the existing agrarian structure. Economists like Adam Smith, Mill and Marshall
gave emphasis on tenurial arrangement as an agrarian Institution. Land reforms have been
brought to include reforms in tenurial arrangements, ceiling on land holdings, distribution of.
Ceiling surplus land and consolidation of land holdings. With a view to providing protection and
safeguard to the tenants, the State Govt, immediately after independence passed the Orissa
Tenants Protection Act in 1948. The main focus of the Act was on (1) Providing securities to
tenants and (2) Fixation of fair rent to be paid by the tenants. The provisions of this Act were
found to be of little help to the tenants because of prevalence of ex-intermediary system. Orissa
Estate Abolition Act, 1951 came into existence and the age-old barrier between the State and
tenants / riots started crumbling down. In 1955, the Orissa Tenancy Relief Act, 1955 and Orissa
Land Reform Act, 1960 came into existence for the purpose of improving the conditions of the
tenants and land holders.

MODULE 2: ORISSA ESTATE ABOLITION ACT 1951

In pursuance of Directive Principles of State Policy, in order to secure economic Justice for the
entire historic Act, that is, Odisha Estate Abolition Act, 1951 took birth. Since land was
important source of wealth, and was concentrated in the lands of few, farms were exploited in
their hands productivity of those land lands were very low, the primary Job during Post-
Independence was Agrarian Reforms.

Prior to enactment of this Act a committee (Naba Krushna Choudhury committee) on Agrarian
Reforms was formed vide GoO resolution No 7353/R Dt. 15.11.1946 and the said committed
submitted it’s report on Dt. 07.07.1949. the Estate Abolition Bill was introduced in State
Legislature on 17.01.1950 and passed on 28.09.1951. the Odisha Estate Abolition Act, 1951
came in to force on 19.02.1952.
As intermediaries were aware of the fact that their fights are going to be abolished after
independence, some illegal transfers were made. So the legislation definition was given effect
certain provision w.e.f. 1st January, 1946.

Meaning of Land Tenure

 It is the way in which land is held by an individual from the Government

 It shows the relationship between the land holder and the State
 The absolute ownership of land rests with the Government. The Government gives
proprietary rights to individuals or communities.

Background of Land Tenure

 The laws of Manu mention one sixth of the gross produce at the legitimate share of the
King. During the war and other emergencies, it was increased to one fourth.
 By Timur represented the first systematic attempt in the direction of converting the
State’s share of the produce into money. Sher-shah made some improvement. However, it
remained incomplete due to his short reign.
 Akbar by his able Finance Minister, Todarmal made certain reform. While fixing the
revenue, scientific and detailed investigation was made to assess the taxable capacity of
different soils.
 Land was carefully measured and divided into four classes representing different grades
of fertility.
 The Government’s share was fixed as one-third of the gross produce. Thus, Mughals did
not introduce any fundamental changes in the ancient revenue system but put a coherant
system in place of customary and unwritten usages of the Hindu administration.
 Malik Amber of Ahmednager made similar improvements in the Deccan. He fixed one-
third of the gross value of produce as the revenue.
 Maratha rulers continued the system. They fixed `Kamal’ or the maximum rates for the
best lands. The assessment was not permanent in majority of the cases. However, `Miras’
tenure was subject to the payment of fixed assessment.
  The system called ‘revenue farming’ was introduced in Bengal in the reign of
Farukhsiyer (1713-19). Under this system, the revenue farmer paid the Government nine-
tenth of the whole collection and kept the rest as his collection charges.
 The right of collecting land revenue for a pargana or a district was sold by public auction
to the highest bidders.
 Due to this, the exploitation of the cultivators started. The revenue farmers became more
dominant. This revenue farming system which started during the Mughal rule in Bengal
was soon extended to other parts of the country.
 In Deccan, Nana Fadanis, in the later part of the 18th Century, had introduced a revenue
system which was very efficient and equitable. It was universally recognised.The revenue
farming system even came to the Deccan.
 In Konkan, the Khots who were earlier revenue farmers acquired landlord rights. In
United Provinces and in Punjab revenue farmers succeeded in acquiring certain overlord
rights.
 The disorders in the revenue administration resulted in many complexities of land tenures
and rights.

Land Tenures under British Rule

Under British Rule, there were three main types of land tenure systems in India. They were
Zamindars, Mahalwari and Rayatwari.

Zamindari: Introduced by Lord Cornwallis in Bengal in 1786.

 Lands of a village or few villages were held by one person or few joint owners who were
responsible for payment of land revenue to the Government.
 There used to be number of intermediaries between the Zamindars and the actual tillers of
the soil. The system took were various forms such as Zamindari, Jagirdari, Inamdari, etc.
 In many cases revenue collectors were raised to the status of land owners. This system
was introduced in many parts of the country.
 In this system, tillers of the soil were exploited by way of exhorbitant rents. There were
no incentives for them to improve the land or to use better cultivation practices. There
were many other social evils of the system.
  It is said that the British introduced Zamindari system to achieve two objectives. First, it
helped in regular collection of land revenue from a few persons i.e. Zamindars. Secondly,
it created a class of people who would remain loyal to the British ruler in the country.

Post – Independence Period

 Agrarian Reforms Committee under Shri J.C.Kumarappa had given the guidelines for the
formulation of land reform policies in the independent India. The committee
recommended that
 All intermediary interest should be abolished and land should belong to the tiller;
 Leasing of land should be prohibited except in case of widows, minors and other disabled
persons.
 All the tenants who had been cultivating land for a period of 6 years should be granted
occupancy rights
 The tenants should have the right to purchase the holdings at reasonable price to be
determined by the land tribunal;
 The agrarian economy should provide an opportunity for the development of the farmers.
 Abolition of Zaminari and Intermediaries Acts;
 India’s First Five year plan – Has clearly mentioned the land policy and the specific
land reform measures to be undertaken. Most of the states passed the legislations for
abolition of zamindari and similar exploitative land tenure systems. The first act in this
respect was passed in Madras in 1948. The other states followed it. Now land tenure
systems like Zamindari, Mahalwari, Jagir, Inam, etc. are abolished in all the states in the
country.
 As a result of abolition of Zaminari and intermediaries, about 26 lakh intermediaries and
20 lakh tenants got proprietory rights of lands i.e. they became the land owners. This has
resulted in improving their economic and social conditions. The land revenue income of
the states also increased.

Tenancy Reforms

 Relation between the land holder (owner) and the actual tiller of the soil.
 The tenancy prevailed in all forms of land tenure systems including Rayatwari system.
The main reason was the increase in the population of landless labourers.
 In 1951, of the total families dependent on agriculture, as many as 23.6 per cent families
belonged to the tenant class.
 The National Sample Survey (8th round) indicated that the lands leased out varied from
11 per cent to 26 per cent of the total, in different states.
 The tenants were exploited by the land owners by way of heavy rents (50 per cent or even
2/3rd of the produce). There was no protection of tenure (evictions on minor pretexts).
Thus, there were no incentives for tenants to make land improvements or to increase
production. This necessitated enacting the legislation for tenancy reforms.
 Tenancy Acts were passed in most of the States, they provided for
o regulation of rents
o security of tenure, and
o Conferment of ownership on tenants.
 Bombay State promptly enacted the legislation as early as in 1950. As regards the
regulation of rents, different states fixed different rates. For instance, in Bombay
(Maharashtra), Gujarat and Rajasthan, one-sixth of the grass produce has been fixed as
the maximum rent; while in Punjab rent fixed is one-third of the produce.
 It was found that there were large scale evictions of tenants on the plea of resumption for
personal cultivation.
 As reported in the draft fourth five year plan, as a result of tenancy legislations in India, 3
million tenants or share croppers became the land owners. Uttar Pradesh was in the
forefront in this respect. The next state in order is Maharashtra where 13.56 lakh tenants
got the ownership rights of about 32 lakh hectares of land by September, 1992.
 Protection of tenants and regulation of rent is the first step in the tenancy reforms. The
ultimate object of the reform is “land to the tiller”. The Tenancy Acts have been moved
in that direction.
Land Tenure of Odisha

 The state of Orissa was formed on 1.4.1936. Prior to 1936 the district of Cuttack, Puri,
Balasore, Sambalpur and Angul formed the “Orissa Division of the Province of Bihar and
Orissa”.
 Taking into consideration the common cultural, social, historical and language factors
into consideration the “Division” acquired the status of a “Province” where Ganjam,
Koraput and a part of Phulbani Districts from Madras Presidency, Khariar and Madhab
Palli Station from Central Province (Present Madhya Pradesh) were transferred to the
newly formed state.
 25 number of princely states merged in the state on 1.1.1948, and finally with the merger
of Mayurbhanj on 1.1.1949 and transfer of Shareikala and Kharsuan to Bihar, the state
achieved its present geographical shape
 People of Odisha mostly dependant on Agriculture as theire source of income.

Historical Background

 Intermediary system between farmer and the king was introduced by Muslim rulers
during 12th to 13th century
 Britishers changed the mechanism of land tenure by involving various of intermediaries.
 The three broad types of tenurial contract consist of crop sharing tenancy,cost sharing
tenancy and fixed rent tenancy found in Odisha
 In crop sharing tenancy the gross produce of the land is devide between landlords and
tenants in the ratio 1:1. The share is normally fifty-fifty with little variations.
 In case of HYV type of seeds, the shares in total produce are determined including cost of
cultivation including all types of cost like labour cost and others
 In cost sharing tenancy, the cost of cultivation is partly borne by the landlords and partly
by the tenants. After bearing the cost of cultivation as per contract, the gross produce is
shared between them in the ratio 1:1.
 In case of fixed rent tenancy, the tenants pay a fixed rent for one agricultural year as
decided or contracted between the landlords and the tenants. Sometimes such contracts
are extended and spread over more than one agricultural year.
  Land mortgaging was also in practice rural Odisha
 The land tenure system of British Orissa shows that the main proprietary tenure was held
by the Zamindars.
 Under the Zamindars, large number of persons, such as Mukuddums, Sarbarakars and
Padhans aquired sub-proprietary title over lands and paid revenue through the Zamindars.
All these persons held legally recognised rights over land in different degrees during the
British regime.
 The very land tenure system has the outcome of British conquest of Orissa made the
actual cultivators into landless Agricultural proletariet.
 Under the Zamindary system of land tenure in Orissa, the estates were very often
possessed by a number of joint shareholders and subordinate proprietors with conflicting
interests.
 They were only interest in extorting from the peasants and they did not have any interest
to improve the productivity of land.
 In Orissa land tenure system between 1803 and 1951, the revenue free land owners or the
privileged tenure-holders consisting of individuals and socio-religious institutions
occupied a prominent place.
 It resulted in social evils as in most cases the proceeds of such lands were rarely devoted
to the purpose for which they were originally granted.
 Most of such rent free land owners are monasteries, temples and other institutions which
acquired a very comfortable living at the cost of poor peasants and these religious and
charitable institutions became the center of communal indulgence.
 Thus the revenue free land owners and their activities created adverse consequences in
the agrarian structure since the cultivators of these revenue-free lands could not acquire
ownership rights over such lands.

Land Reforms in Odisha

 In the United Nations resolutions and reports, land reform is treated as a reform in
institutional arrangements in the existing agrarian structure.
 Economists like Adam Smith, Mill and Marshall gave emphasis on tenurial arrangement
as an agrarian Institution.
  Land reforms have been brought to include reforms in tenurial arrangements, ceiling on
land holdings, distribution of ceiling surplus land and consolidation of land holdings.
 With a view to providing protection and safeguard to the tenants, the State Govt,
immediately after independence passed the Orissa Tenants Protection Act in 1948. The
main focus of the Act was on (1) Providing securities to tenants and (2) Fixation of fair
rent to be paid by the tenants. The provisions of this Act were found to be of little help to
the tenants because of prevalence of ex-intermediary system.
 Orissa Estate Abolition Act, 1951 came into existence and the age-old barrier between
the State and tenants / riots started crumbling down. In 1955, the Orissa
 Tenancy Relief Act,1955 and Orissa Land Reform Act,1960 came into existence for the
purpose of improving the conditions of the tenants and land holders

Short Definitions

Estate: U/s 2(g) of OEA it means any land held by or vested in an intermediary and included
under one entry in any revenue roll or any of the general registers of revenue-paying lands and
revenue free lands, prepared and maintained under the law relating to land revenue for the time
being in force or under any rule, order, custom or usage having the force of law, and includes
revenue free lands not entered in any register or revenue roll and all classes of tenures or under-
tenures & any jagir, inam or maufi or other similar grant.

Ekpaatia: U/s 3 of OEA kings the tenant paid some kind of rent which was maintained in the
records that document is referred as ekpaatia. Tenant had to file a case before tahsildar as long
with ekpaatia document that determine tenancy right. Apart from 44 acres land if any land is kept
as khas possession such land if includes buildings, offices, outhouses such land can be retained
by intermediary.

Intermediary: U/s 2(h) of OEA proprietor, sub-proprietor, landlord, land-holder, malguzar,

thikadar, gaontia, tenure-holder, under-tenure holder & includes an inamdar, a jagirdar, zamindar
etc including of the Ruler of an Indian State merged with the State of Orissa and all other holders
or owners in interest in land between the raiyat and the State.

Tenure Holder: U/s 5(1) of OEA a person who has acquired from a proprietor or another tenure-
holder, a right to hold land for the purpose of collecting rents or bring it under cultivation by
establishing tenancy on it. Section 5(5) provides that a tenant holding more than 33 acres shall be
presumed to be a tenure-holder until contrary is shown.

Intermediary interest: U/s 2(h,h) of OEA Means an estate or any rights or interest therein held
or owned by or vested in an intermediary and any reference to ‘estates’ in this Act shall be
construed as including a reference to ‘intermediary interest’ also

Homestead: U/s 2(i) of OEA Means a dwelling house used by the intermediary for the purpose
of his own residence or for the purpose of letting out on rent together with any courtyard,
compound, orchard & out buildings attached thereto & includes any tank, library & place of
worship appertaining to such dwelling house but doesn’t include building primarily used for
office or kutchery after 01.01.1946 for the administration of the estate.

Khas possession: U/s 2(j) of OEA Used w.r.t the possession of an intermediary of any land used
for agricultural or horticultural purposes. It means the possession of such intermediary by
cultivating such land or carrying horticultural operations thereon himself with his own stock or
by his own servants or by hired labour or with hired stock.

Raiyat: U/s 2(n) of OEA Means any person holding the land for the purposes of cultivation and
who has acquired the right of occupancy according to the tenancy law or rules for the time being
in force in that area, or in the absence of such law or rules, the custom prevalent in that area; As
per sub-section 2 of S.4 of OT Act, raiyat is one category of tenant. S.23 of OT Act provides
that a person holding land continuously for 12 years shall be deemed to be a settled raiyat in that
village. S.24 provides that a settled raiyat has a right to occupancy.

Trust: U/s 2(o) of OEA means a trust as defined in S.3 of the Indian Trusts act, 1882 and shall
include an express or constructive Trust existing for a public purpose of a charitable or religious
nature & a Hindu, Muslim, Christian, Buddhist or any other religious or charitable endowment.

Trust Estate: U/s 2(o,o) of OEA means an estate the whole of the net income whereof under
any trust or other legal obligation has been dedicated exclusively to charitable or religious
purposes of a public nature without any reservation of pecuniary benefit to any individual.

Date of vesting: U/s 2(f) of OEA means, in relation to an estate vested in the State the date of
publication in the Gazette of the notification under Sub-section (1) of Section 3 [or Sub-section
(1) of Section 3-A] in respect of such estate and in the case of surrender by an Intermediary
under Section 4 the date of the execution of the agreement

S.3-A. Vesting of Intermediary interest: (1) Without prejudice to the power under the last
preceding section, the State Govt may by notification declares that the intermediary interests of
all intermediaries or a class of intermediaries in the whole or a part of the estate have passed to
and become vested in the State free from all encumbrances. (2) The notification referred to in
sub-section (1) shall be published in the Gazette & on such publication shall be conclusive
evidence of the notice of the declaration to every whose interest is affected thereby.

S.5- Consequences of vesting of an estate in the State: S.5(a)- Subject to subsequent

provisions of this Chapter the entire estate including all communal lands & parambokes, other
non-raiyati lands, waste land, trees, orchads, pasture lands, forest, mines & minerals, rivers
&streams, quarries, tanks and other irrigation works, water channels, fisheries, ferries, hats and
bazars & buildings or structures together with land on which they stand shall vest absolutely in
the State Govt free from all encumbrances and such intermediary shall cease to have any interest
in such estate other than the interests expressly saved by or under the provisions of this Act. (i)
Where the Collector is satisfied in respect of the settlement or lease of any land or mines or
minerals comprised in such estate or the transfer of any kind of interests in any holding used
primarily as office or kutchery for the collection of rent of such estate or as rest houses for estate
servants on duty or as golas for storing rent in kind or part thereof, made or created at any time
after 1st day of January, 1946, that such settlement, lease or transfer was made with the object of
defeating any provision of this Act or obtaining higher compensation, thereunder, he shall power
to make enquire in respect of such settlement, lease or transfer and may after giving reasonable
notice to the parties concerned to appear & be heard, set aside any such settlement, lease or
transfer , dispossess the person claiming under it & take possession of such property in the
manner provided in clause (h) on such terms as may appear to him fair & equitable. Provided
that in case where the Collector decides not to set aside any such settlement, lease or transfer he
shall refer the cases to the BOR for confirmation of the settlement, lease or transfer & the orders
passed by the BOR in this behalf shall be final. After vesting of estates certain interest of Ex-
Intermediaries are saved expressly. Those are explain U/s6, 7, 8 including section 7-A and 8-
A.homestead Land
S.6 - Homesteads of intermediaries & buildings together with land on which such buildings
stand in the possession of intermediaries & used as golas, factories or mills before the 1st day of
January, 1946 shall notwithstanding contained in this Act, be deemed to be settled by the
Government with such intermediary & with all the share-holders owning the estate, who shall be
entitled to retain possession of such homesteads of such buildings or structures together with the
lands on which they stand, as tenants under the State Government subject to the payment of such
fair & equitable ground rent as may be determined by the Collectors in the prescribed manner.

S.7. Land in Khas Possession of Intermediary: Certain other lands in Khas Possession of
intermediaries to be retained by them on payment of rent as raiyat having occupancy raiyat on
and from the date of vesting. (j)-Khas Possession - Used w.r.t the possession of an intermediary
of any land used for agricultural or horticultural purposes Means the possession of such
intermediary by cultivating such land or carrying horticultural operations thereon himself with
his own stock or by his own servants or by hired labour or with hired stock

Sec.8 –Continuity of tenure of tenants: (1) Any person who immediately before the date of
vesting of an estate in the State Govt was in possession of any holding as a tenant under an
intermediary shall, on and from the date of vesting be deemed to be a tenant of the State
government and such person shall hold the land in the same rights and subject to the same
restrictions and liabilities as he was entitled or subject to immediately before the date of vesting.

Sec.8-A – Filling of claims U/s. 6, 7 & 8 & dispute relating thereto. On the failure filling the
claims within the period specified under this Section the provisions of Cl.(h) of section 5 shall,
notwithstanding anything to the contrary in sections 6,7 & 8, apply as if the right to possession of
the land or buildings or structures, as the case may be, had vested in the State Government by the
operation of this Act and thereupon the right to make any such claim as aforesaid shall stand
extinguished.Provided when such failure is due to pendency of proceedings in court of law
disputing validity of notification U/s 3 or 3A State Government may extend the period for filling
of the claim.

Saavik: It tells the genology of the family records and tiers where cases are instituted u/s 7,8,6 .
it also helps in finding whether the cases are resolved or not which is reflected in bandobast and
be bandobast khata before 1965
Abada Ajogya Anabadi Khata: Lands which are not fit for agriculture • River, nala, lake, sea,
water logged lands, pata jora, river bund • Hillock, mountain, stone bed, hill, hilly area • Kuda or
balikuda (sand hill)

Abada Jogya Anabadi Khata: Lands which are arable or cultivable • Patita(old or new), grassy
land, slopy land • Sandy land which is capable of agriculture • Bushy land / chot jungle •
Abandoned holdings • Surrendered holdings • Evicted land due to conversion to non agriculture
purposes u/s 8 of OLR Act. • Char & Diara lands • Lands reserved for gram panchayat, jawans •
Basti jogya lands

Salami: One-time payment for land revenue to the collector

Jabardhakal: forcibly acquiring land

Haal: present Land record

Deshahat jagir: Land of village servant

Gochara: Grazing land.

Important Terms for describing types of property

Khatas

 Rakhita khata: Lands reserved for different purposes. • Acquired vested lands but not
transferred. • Lands given as advance possession but not alienated • Lands relinquished
by departments • Lands reserved fopr various purposes under OGLS Act • Lands
transferred to Gram Panchayat • Gramya Jungle or lands reserved for village forest •
Land reserved for village, busti • Land under master plan area • Khas mahal,Nazul.
Gramkanth paramboke, abadi lands
 Sarbasadharana khata: Land used for communal purposes. • Cremation/ burial ground,
ground used for carcass disposal • Melan padia, play ground, hat padia kothaghar, akhada
grar, Dhangada-dhangadi ghar market • Temple, mosque, church gurudwar, matha,
mandap, dolabedi, bijestahali etc • GocharDanda, go-danda, gothapadia • Village road,
pucca road • Land reserved for public purposes.