DAMODARAM SANJIVAYYA NATIONAL LAW

UNIVERSITY

VISAKHAPATNAM, A.P., INDIA

PROJECT TITLE:
Inam Lands

SUBJECT:
Transfer of Property

NAME OF THE FACULTY:

Assistant Professor, Mr. P. Jogi Naidu

Name of the Candidate: Sai Suvedhya R.

Roll No.: 2018LLB076
Semester: 4th semester
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

1
I would like to express my sincere gratitude to my respected Transfer of Property professor –
Assistant Professor, Mr. P. Jogi Naidu , for giving me this golden opportunity to take up
this project titled – ‘Inam Lands’ and my sincere thanks to her for her continuous support of
my study and related research, for her time, patience, motivation and immense knowledge.
Her guidance has helped during the entire of process of my research. I could not have
imagined having a better advisor and mentor for my research.

2
TABLE OF CONTENTS:

 INAM LANDS:-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 04
 RYOTWARI LANDS:------------------------------------------------------------------------ 06
 CASE ANALYSIS:----------------------------------------------------------------------------
10
 CASE NAME:----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
10
 PETITONERS:--------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 10
 RESPONDENTS:------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 10
 CASE TYPE:----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 10
 COURT:----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 10
 BENCH:----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 10
 LAWS DISSCUSSED:------------------------------------------------------------------------
10
 FACTS:----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 10
 OBSERVATIONS OF THE COURT:------------------------------------------------------ 12
 JUDGEMENT:--------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 13
 CONCLUSION:------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 14
 BIBLIOGRAPHY:---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 15

3
INAM LANDS:

An Inam is a gift of land or land revenue. The origin of the Inam can be traced back to the
times of Hindu, Mohammadan periods of rule. Parcels of lands were granted by the Hindu
and Mohammadan Rulers to persons for services rendered by such persons or the services to
be rendered by such persons in future. Inams are of different kinds as detailed hereunder.

Service Inams :- A service inam is an inam granted to a person or persons burdening them
with certain condition of service viz., Washerman Inam, Potters Inam, Carpenter's Inam etc.,

Enfranchised Inam :- An enfranchised inam is one where the holder of which is relived
from the conditions of service subject to payment of quitrent on the lands. He will have all
the privileges of a ryotwari holder. Quitrent payable on such enfranchised inam lands is
usually 1/4th or 1/8th or sum such fraction of the full assessment payable on the land. Major
Inams :- A major inam consists of a whole village or a major portion of the village granted as
an inam and confirmed as such by the Inam Commissioner.

Minor Inams :- A minor inam consists of a small extent of land of about five or ten acres of
land granted as a inam and confirmed or recongnised by the Inam Commissioner.

Darmila Inams :- A Darmila Inam is an inam of Post-settlement origin i.e., the land granted
by the land holder of an estate subsequent to the permanent settlement in 1802. Darmila
Inams are of two categorics viz.,

1) those which are in personal service of the land holders and

2) those which are intended for service to the village community Village

Artizan Inams :- Village Artizan Inam are inams granted by the State for the services to be
rend ered to the village community by the barbers, Carpenters, Black Smiths, Washermen,
Potters, Purohits and other Artizans.

Dasabandham Inams: - A Dasabandham Inam is a grant of land or revenue as a

compensation for the construction of a tank, channel or well. If it is an assignment of revenue
it is called Shamiltat Dasabandham.

Whole Inams :- A Whole Inam village is a village granted as an inam and includes
Agraharams held entirely free of land tax or on an favourable quitrent and such inams will be
dealt with same principals as prescribed for minor inams.

4
The Inams (Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari) Act, 1956 The Act provides to abolish
the inam tenure of lands and convert them into ryotwari lands. It applies to pre-settlement
inam lands, both major and minor inams where a grant in inam has been made, confirmed or
recognised by Government, not being an Estate. It also applies to post settlement minor inams
coming under the purview of Sec.17(1) (b) of the E.A. Act. 48.

Preliminary Enquiry: The preliminary enquiry u/s 3 empowers the M.R.O either suomotu or
on application to determine

(i) whether a particular land is an inam land

(ii) whether such inam land is in a ryotwari, zamindari or inam village and
(iii) whether such inam land is held by an institution.

In granting ryotwari pattas, the provisions of Sec. 4 shall be followed (ie) in the case of
an inam land in a ryotwari or zamindari village, the person or institution holding such
land as inamdar shall be entitled to a ryotwari patta. In the case of an inam land in an
inam village, if the land is held by an institution, it shall be entitled to a ryotwari patta.

If such land is held by an Inamdar on the date of commencement of the Act, he shall be
entitled to a ryotwari patta for 1/3rd share of land and the tenant declared to be in
occupation of the land on 7-1-48 shall be entitled to a ryotwari patta for the 2/3rd share of
the land. If there is no such declared tenant the inamdar shall be entitled to a ryotwari
patta for the entire land. If such land is held by an inamdar other than an institution on the
date of commencement of the Act, but is in the occupation of a tenant on the said date, the
tenant who is declared to be in the occupation of that land on 7-1-48 shall be entitled to a
ryotwari patta for 2/3rd share of that land and the inamdar shall be entitled to a ryotwari
patta for the remaining 1/3rd share thereof, and if there is no such declared tenant, the
tenant in the occupation of the land on the date of commencement of this Act, shall be
entitled to ryotwari patta for 2/3rds of that land and the inamdar shall be entitled to a
ryotwari patta for the remaining 1/3rd share thereof.

In the case of inam land held by an institution in an inam village, the tenant who is
declared to be in occupation of an inam land as on 7-1-1948 under Sec.5 or if there is no
such tenant the tenant in occupation of the land on the date of commencement of this Act,
shall have a right of permanent occupancy in the land and the said right shall be heritable
and also shall be transferable by sale, gift or otherwise subject to the condition that he

5
shall not be a defaulter for more than sixty days when the rent becomes payable and he
shall not use the land otherwise to make it unfit for agricultural purpose impairing its
value materially (Sec.8). Whoever infringes the above conditions is liable for eviction
according to the procedure prescribed in Sec.9.

Through an Amendment Act which came into effect on 26-6-75, all communal lands and
porambokes in inam land stand transferred to and vest in Government free of all
encumbrances (Sec.2-A). As per Government Order Ms.No.77, Revenue, Dated.22-1-68,
the power to discharge the functions under the Act was delegated to the D.R.O's in
Andhra areas. In the telangana areas MRO conducts preliminary enquiry and sends the
same to the RDO for approval. The RDO is the sanctioning authority.

Inamdar has to pay an amount as prescribed in the concerned Treasury and submit the
receipt of the same to the RDO. The RDO will issue a patta certificate directly to the
Inamdar and a copy will be sent to the MRO. All the related records are maintained in the
RDO Office. Based on the copy of the patta certificate, the change of type ownership is
incorporated in the Amendment Register. As the Inam lands are treated as normal patta
lands, they are saleable.

Appeal and Revision: Against the orders of the M.R.O./ or Special Dy.Tahsildar (Inams)
an appeal shall lie to the R.D.O within sixty days of such order. (Sec7(2)) An appeal
against the decision u/s 3 (1) on the above three aspects shall lie to the R.D.O within sixty
days. After becoming final, such decision in Form-II shall be published in the District
Gazette. The enquiry for granting ryotwari pattas is then taken up u/s 7 after giving a
notice in Form-V to all persons or institutions interested. The Commissioner of Appeals,
office of the Chief Commissioner of Land administration has powers of revision of any
proceedings of the M.R.O. or the R.D.O either suo moto or on application without any
limit of time (Sec.7 and 14-A).

RYOTWARI LANDS:

The Ryotwari system was a land revenue system in British India, introduced by Thomas

Munro in 1820 based on system administered by Captain Alexander Read in the
Baramahal district. It allowed the government to deal directly with the cultivator ('ryot')
for revenue collection, and gave the peasant freedom to give up or acquire new land for
cultivation. The peasant was assessed for only the lands he was cultivating.

6
this system was in operation for nearly 5 years and had many features of revenue system of
the Mughals. It was instituted in some parts of British India, one of the three main systems
used to collect revenues from the cultivators of agricultural land. These taxes included
undifferentiated land revenue and rents, collected simultaneously. Where the land revenue
was imposed directly on the ryots (the individual cultivators who actually worked the land)
the system of assessment was known as ryotwari. Where the land revenue was imposed
indirectly—through agreements made with Zamindars -- the system of assessment was
known as zamindari. In Bombay, Madras, Assam and Burma the Zamindar usually did not
have a position as a middleman between the government and the farmer.

An official report by John Stuart Mill, who was working for the British East India
Company in 1857, explained the Ryotwari land tenure system as follows:

“Under the Ryotwari System every registered holder of land is recognised as its proprietor,
and pays direct to Government. He is at liberty to sublet his property, or to transfer it by gift,
sale, or mortgage. He cannot be ejected by Government so long as he pays the fixed
assessment, and has the option annually of increasing or diminishing his holding, or of
entirely abandoning it. In unfavourable seasons remissions of assessment are granted for
entire or partial loss of produce. The assessment is fixed in money, and does not vary from
year to year, in those cases where water is drawn from a Government source of irrigation to
convert dry land into wet, or into two-crop land, when an extra rent is paid to Government for
the water so appropriated; nor is any addition made to the assessment for improvements
effected at the Ryot's own expense. The Ryot under this system is virtually a Proprietor on a
simple and perfect title, and has all the benefits of a perpetual lease without its
responsibilities, in as much as he can at any time throw up his lands, but cannot be ejected so
long as he pays his dues; he receives assistance in difficult seasons, and is irresponsible for
the payment of his neighbours... The Annual Settlements under Ryotwari are often
misunderstood, and it is necessary to explain that they are rendered necessary by the right
accorded to the Ryot of diminishing or extending his cultivation from year to year. Their
object is to determine how much of the assessment due on his holding the Ryot shall pay, and
not to reassess the land. In these cases where no change occurs in the Ryots holding a fresh
Patta or lease is not issued, and such parties are in no way affected by the Annual Settlement,
which they are not required to attend.”

7
APPLICATION OF THE I.A.ACT TO INAM LANDS IN RYOTWARI OR
ZAMINDARI VILLAGES:

An Inamdar other than an institution, of any unenfrachaised Inam has sold or otherwise
transferred his interest in the Inam land held by him, the transferee, who has acquired the said
interest who is in possession of such land on the date of commencement, shall be deemed to
be the Inamdar for the purpose of the Act.

THE ANDHRA PRADESH (TELANGANA AREA) ABOLITION OF INAMS ACT,

1955

The Act provides for abolition of all Inams other than village service inams and inams held
by religious and charitable institutions in Telangana districts of Andhra Pradesh and giving
adequate compensation for the lands resumed from the Inamdars. It also allows retention by
the Inamdar as well as his tenents of lands under their personal cultivation to the extent of the
maximum allowed under the Hyderabad tenancy and agricultural lands Act, 1950. The
provisions of the Act have been enforced in two phases with the two different dates, firstly
abolition and vesting inams in the state was on 20.07.1955 and rest of provisions such as
conferring occupancy rights etc., is from 01.11.1973. The Collector is competent to decide
the cases under the Act. (The RDOs have been empowered to discharge the functions of
Collector by G.O. Ms.No. 1122 dt.20.8.75). Any person aggrieved by the order of Collector
under Section 10 can appeal to the Board of Revenue and under Section 19,20,21,22 may
appeal to Spl. Tribunal. Further a revision on the orders of Collector or Spl. Tribunal also lies
to the High Court. It is further submitted that the Government have amended the words
“District Collector” in place of “Board of Revenue” in Sub-Rule (1) of Rule 18 of the AP
(T.A) Abolition of Inam rules 1975, vide G.O. Ms. No. 663 Rev (F) Dept., dated 1.6.1977.
The Government further issued another amendment reserving the subject “The A.P. (TA)
Abolition of Inam Act 1955” to the Joint Collector after deleting the same from the Collector
vide G.O.Ms.No. 818, Rev. (Ser.I) Dept., dated 06.09.1990. In view of the above Rule
Position, the Commissioner, Appeals has no jurisdiction to entertain any orders passed under
Section 24(1) of the AP (TA) Abolition of Inam Act 1955.

THE ANDHRA PRADESH (ANDHRA AREA) INAMS (ABOLITION AND

CONVERSION INTO RYOTWARI) ACT, 1956

In December 1955, the Government introduced the Madras Estates Lands (Andhra
Amendment) Bill, 1955 in the Legislative Assembly for the Amendment of Section 3(2) (d)

8
of the Madras Estates Land Act, 1908, with the object of enlarging the definition of ‘Estate’
under that Act so as to cover certain marginal inams such as inam hamlets and inam
khandrigas. The Bill was referred to a select Committee, which had made certain
recommendations in regard to the provisions of the Bill. The Government have carefully
considered these recommendations and have decided that the scope of the above Bill should
be restricted to inam khandrigas and inam hamlets in inam villages and that separate
legislation should be undertaken with a view to converting other inams in inam villages as
well as all inams in ryotwari and zamindari, villages into ryotwari tenure.

The present bill accordingly provides for the conversion of all inam lands other than estates
into ryotwari tenure. The Bill provides that in the case of inam lands held by inamdars other
than religious, charitable and educational institutions in inam villages, the tenant, if any, who
was in occupation of the lands on the 7th January, 1948 (the date on which the Madras
Estates Land (Reduction of Rent) Act, 1947 came into force, but who was subsequently
evicted by or at the instance of the Inamdar, or in the absence of such tenant, the tenant, if
any, in occupation of the land on the date of commencement of the Act shall be entitled to a
ryotwari patta in respect of two-thirds of the land in his occupation, on his suffering the
remaining one-third in favour of the inamdar.

The inamdar will be entitled to a ryotwari patta in respect of the remaining one-third, such
one-third share being deemed to be the compensation payable to the inamdar for the
extinguishments of his rights in the two-thirds share of the land. The inamdar will also be
entitled to a ryotwari patta in respect of the land in his occupation on the date of
commencement of the Act provided that no tenant is entitled to a ryotwari patta thereto on the
ground of his having been in occupation thereof on the 7th January, 1948.

9
CASE ANALYSIS:-

CASE NAME: R. Shivshankar Reddy vs. State of Andhra Pradesh

PETITONER: R. Shivshankar Reddy

RESPONDENTS: State of Andhra Pradesh

CASE TYPE: Writ Petition

COURT: High Court of Judicature at Hyderabad for the state of Telangana and Andhra
Pradesh

BENCH: Justice S.V. Bhatt

LAWS DISSCUSSED:

Section 22(A)(1)(b) and Section 22(A)(1)(e) of the Registration Act, 1908

Article 226 of the Constitution of India

FACTS:

The subject matter of the Writ Petition is Survey Nos.397/1 and 397/2 of Vempalli Village
and Mandal, Y.S.R. Kadapa District. The petitioners pray for mandamus declaring the action
of respondent Nos.2 and 3 in including the subject matter of the Writ Petition in prohibitory
list either under Section 22(A)(1)(b) or Section 22(A)(1)(e) of the Registration Act, 1908 (for
short, “the Act”), as arbitrary and unconstitutional and further pray for consequential
direction to receive and register the documents presented under the Act for registration of the
subject mater.

The petitioners aver that through registered sale deed dated 21.06.1927, the predecessors-in-
interest of petitioners purchased the subject matter and ever-since are in possession and
enjoyment of the subject matter. The sale deed dated 21.06.1927, though refers to one survey
number i.e. Survey No.397/1, in the course of time the subject matter is sub-divided as 397/1
and 397/2. The petitioners refer to innumerable registrations taking place for subject matter of
Writ Petition between 1983-2016 and contend that inclusion now in prohibitory list is
impermissible.

10
According to petitioners, the subject matter cannot and could not be treated 2 as land which
can be prohibited for any of the purposes stipulated under Section 22(A)(1)(b) or (e) of the
Act. The petitioners, therefore, prayed for receiving the documents presented for registration
for subject matter. The third respondent filed counter affidavit. The counter affidavit justifies
inclusion of subject matter in prohibitory list for the following reasons.

“In reply to para 2 of the petitioners affidavit, it is submitted that, originally, the land is
classified as service Inam which is fully prohibited for taking up the any kind of registration.
It will come through hereditary. As per rules applicable, the lands come under service Inam
should be got converted into ryotvari patta so as to get rights like patta land. But, the lands
have not been converted into ryotvari patta for which, it is highly objectionable for any kind
of registration which is differed. Hence, the contention of the petitioners regarding the
registration of such type of service Inam lands stressed in this para may not be correct and the
same is liable to be rejected. In reply to para 3 of the petitioners affidavit, it is submitted that
while contacting the Sub-Registrar, Vempalli to issue market value certificate in respect of
the lands in Sy.No.397/1 & 2 extent 8.22 and 2.00 acres respectively totalling to an extent of
10.22 acres of Vempalli Village, he has bluntly refused stating that the lands are included in
the prohibitory list under Section 22(A)(1)(a) of the registration and the same was uploaded
in District website by the District Collector, since, the above lands are included in the
prohibitory list, question regarding the registration of such lands does not arise. Sri R.Shiva
Sankar Reddy and others have filed Writ Petition 12574/2018 duly praying for registration of
their lands in Survey Nos.397/1 and 397/2 extent 2.40 acres of Vempally Village which have
been purchased from Sri Narasaiah and Rajaiah by way of registered Document dated
21.06.1927 and later on, apportioned among the following during the year 1969.

The matter has been got verified with reference to RSR and Adangal maintained and it is
observed that the land in Sy.No.397 extent 10.22 acres of Vempalli Village is stands
classified as service Inam in the name of Aturu Subbaiah and 4 others whereas come it is
indicated in the Adangal like Sy.No.397/1 and 397/2 extent 8.22 and 2.00 acres respectively
totalling to an extent of 10.22 acres of Vempalli Village as dwelling houses. The Government
in Memo 126/Assig1(1)/2016 dated 08.02.2016 have directed all the District Collectors to
prepare the list of properties covered by clause (a) to (d) of section 22A(a) and properties
under clause (e) of section 22(A)(1) for publication in the A.P. Gazette. Hence, the above
indicated lands have been included in the list of prohibited properties under Section 22-A(1)
(a) of the Registration Act, 1908 for prohibition. The land in Sy.No.397 extent 10.22 acres of

11
Vempalli Village which was classified as service Inam has been got sub-divided into 2 letters
like 397/1 and 397/2 extent 8.22 and 2.00 acres respectively and those two Sy.Nos. are
included in the list of prohibited list.”

OBSERVATIONS OF THE COURT:

The Sub-Registrar/respondent No.5 has produced the record communicated by respondent

Nos.2 and 3 under Section 22(A) of the Act. Let me at the first instance refer to the admitted
state of affairs and then consider the fact in issue between the parties. On 25.06.2016, on the
information given by respondent Nos.2 and 3, the subject matter of the Writ Petition has been
included under Section 22(A)(1)(b) of the Act. On 31.03.2018, a revised list of properties,
which are prohibited from registration under Section 22 4 of the Act, was communicated. The
admitted case of respondent Nos.2, 3 and 5 is that the subject matter of the Writ Petition is
not now included under the list prepared under Section 22(A)(1)(b) of the Act. To the same
effect, the fifth respondent addressed a letter to the office of learned Government Pleader as
well. Therefore, the assertion of petitioners that the subject matter is included in the
prohibitory list under Section 22(A)(1)(b) of the Act is denied by respondents. Hence, it is
accordingly made clear that no relief by reference to Section 22(A)(1)(b) of the Act needs to
be considered by this Court. The case of petitioners is that subject matter of the Writ Petition
was and is private patta land. The earliest sale deed relied on by the petitioner is dated
21.06.1927. Therefore, once the subject matter is not included under any of the sub-Sections
namely (a) to (d) under Section 22(A)(1) of the Act, the subject matter cannot and could not
be included under sub-Section (e) of Section 22(A)(1) of the Act. Further, for referring to
clause (e) of Section 22(A)(1) of the Act, the requirement of law is a notification and in the
case on hand no notification was issued and consequently, the rights of the citizen cannot be
adversely be affected without recourse to law. The Assistant Government Pleader refers to
the stand taken in the counter affidavit and contends that according to the revenue records,
the subject matter is classified as service Inam. Therefore, a list is forwarded to the competent
authority on 13.10.2017 for issuing notification under Section 22(A)(1)(e) of the Act. Hence,
refusing to register the document presented for registration for subject matter is justifiable.
The contention is merely noted to be rejected. 5 According to the view taken by this Court in
a catena of decisions including the decision in C.Radhakrishnama Naidu v. Government
of Andhra Pradesh1 the respondents to prohibit registration of a document under Section
22(A)(1)(e) of the Act issuance of notification is a sine quo non. Respondents cannot treat the
1
2015(4) ALT 1

12
pending proposal on issuing notification and refuse to register the documents. Further, the list
placed before this Court by the Tahsildar/third respondent admits the state of affairs namely
that several registered transactions were taken place and entire subject matter is described as
either houses, commercial complexes etc. As on date, for the reasons referred to above,
refusing to receive the documents presented by the petitioners under Section 22(A)(1)(e) of
the Act is unsustainable.

JUDGEMENT:

The petitioners are given liberty to submit the document for registration for subject matter
before respondent No.5. Respondent No.5 is directed to consider the document for
registration, if the same is otherwise in order under the Stamp Act. No order as to costs.
Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed.

13
CONCLUSION:

Reforms in the laws related to Inam Lands are therefore highly necessary. If reforms are not
implemented in the near future this will lead to further litigation as in the above case
discussed in this project. The old laws of Inam Lands as according to the British Rule have no
place in the society today and are not at par with the developing world. The laws need to be
further reformed in order to protect the interests of the farmers. Along with the formation of
new laws the government needs to see that these laws are implemented properly. They need
to educate the government officials about these laws so that there is no further confusion or
litigations taking place as in the above case. Conversion of lands to Ryotwari Patta Lands is a
positive step for the farmers, but it needs to be seen that these laws are not misused or
implemented incorrectly and are not infringing the rights of others.

14
BIBLIOGRAPHY:

 https://ccla.ap.gov.in/CCLA/Uploads/ActsManuals/Inam%20Abolition%20Act,
%201956.pdf
 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inamdar_(feudal_title)
 http://www.bareactslive.com/AP/AP188.HTM
 https://www.latestlaws.com/bare-acts/state-acts-rules/andhra-pradesh-state-
laws/andhra-pradesh-andhra-area-inams-abolition-conversion-ryotwari-act1956/
 http://www.mcrhrdi.gov.in/IAS2013/PPTs/A%20.%20A%20INAMS.pdf

15