October 09, 2018
Case name: Sunita Agarwal v. State of U.P.
In the case, the Petitioner had got agricultural plot declared as non-agricultural and later on the Petitioner applied for the cancellation of the earlier declaration. The application was dismissed saying that the petitioner by getting the declaration cancelled wanted to save stamp duty. One of the intrinsic provision in the case was Section 82 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006. It was submitted by the respondent.
The respondent in the case contended that if Revenue Inspector had found that no agricultural work was being done then definitely he could not have given a report that the declaration could not be reversed. He submitted that if a land is vacant it could be always used for agriculture.
However, reversal of the declaration was malafidely being sought as the petitioner wanted to sell the land and save stamp duty.
The High Court of Allahabad held that if a land is vacant it could never be concluded that it would never be used for agriculture. Unless a building comes up the land could always be used for agriculture.
The entire case can be accessed here.