Prior sanction for transfer of regranted land was not essential where the statute allowed regularisation on payment of the prescribed amount.

Unamended Section 5(3) of the Karnataka Village Offices Abolition Act required previous sanction for transfer of regranted land, with the only express condition for sanction being payment of an amount equal to fifteen times the full assessment. On that construction, a transfer made without prior sanction was not necessarily void and could be regularised by payment of the prescribed amount. The later amendment to Section 5(3) did not alter the settled interpretation governing transfers under the unamended provision, which had been acted upon for years.

---

---

Issues: Whether a transfer of regranted land made without previous sanction under unamended Section 5(3) of the Karnataka Village Offices Abolition Act, 1961 was void, or could be regularised on payment of the prescribed amount.

Analysis: The restriction in unamended Section 5(3) made transfer of regranted land subject to previous sanction of the Deputy Commissioner, and the only express condition for grant of such sanction was payment of an amount equal to fifteen times the full assessment of the land. The provision did not indicate any other principles governing grant or refusal of sanction. The construction placed by the High Court had been acted upon for many years, and transactions had been arranged on that basis. The later amendment to Section 5(3) could not displace that settled interpretation for transfers governed by the unamended provision.

Conclusion: The absence of previous sanction under the unamended provision did not render the transfer void, and the transfer could be regularised by payment of the prescribed amount. The answer was against the State.

Final Conclusion: The Court upheld the Karnataka High Court's interpretation of Section 5(3) and declined to interfere, resulting in dismissal of the State's special leave petitions and appeals.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a statutory restriction on transfer makes prior sanction turn only on payment of a specified amount and supplies no other governing criteria, a transfer made without such sanction is not necessarily void and may be treated as capable of regularisation on payment of the amount prescribed by the statute.

---