Facts of the case
- The Government of Telangana has granted a lease of land located in a Scheduled Area to person ‘A’.
- Person ‘A’ is a non-tribal (implied unless specified otherwise).
- ‘B’, a member of a Scheduled Tribe, has objected to the grant of lease.
- The land falls under the category of tribal lands that are protected under special constitutional and statutory provisions.
Issues in the case
- Whether the State Government can lawfully lease land situated in Scheduled Areas to non-tribal individuals or entities.
- Whether the lease granted to ‘A’ violates the rights of tribal communities under the Fifth Schedule.
- Whether ‘B’, being a tribal resident, has the right to challenge such lease allocation.
- Whether the lease is in conformity with the Andhra Pradesh Scheduled Areas Land Transfer Regulation, 1959 (as applicable to Telangana).
Principles associated with it
- The Fifth Schedule of the Constitution provides special protections for tribal areas, including restrictions on land transfers.
- The Andhra Pradesh Scheduled Areas Land Transfer Regulation, 1959 (Regulation 1 of 1959), prohibits transfer of immovable property from tribals to non-tribals in Scheduled Areas.
- The term “transfer” includes lease, sale, mortgage, or any other form of conveyance.
- Even if the lease is by the government, it must not contravene the protective framework meant for Scheduled Tribes.
- In the landmark judgment Samatha v. State of Andhra Pradesh (1997), the Supreme Court held that lease of tribal land to non-tribals, including corporations or private individuals, is invalid unless permitted by law and shown to be in public interest.
- The State must ensure that the interests and cultural rights of tribals are protected and promoted.
Judgement
- The lease granted to ‘A’, if ‘A’ is a non-tribal, is void and unenforceable under the existing law.
- The objection raised by ‘B’, a tribal, is valid and legally sustainable.
- As per the Samatha judgment, even State action cannot override the constitutional safeguards for Scheduled Tribes without proper legal and tribal welfare justification.
- The land should be restored or protected for the use and benefit of the tribal community.
- The lease must be cancelled if found to violate the protective provisions of the Regulation and the Constitution.