MLRC

HomepageMLRC

Tag: MLRC

A traditional Maharashtra farmstead in soft morning light, with weathered stone boundary markers and a dry-stone wall in the foreground and a small tiled-roof dwelling among green fields behind.
CategoriesLand Investment

Tribal Land in Maharashtra: Why Section 36A Can Void Your Purchase

By Girish Chhalwani,

TL;DR

  • Section 36A of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966 requires the previous sanction of the Collector before occupancy held by a tribal is transferred to a non-tribal.
  • Rule 4(1)(a) of the Maharashtra Land Revenue (Transfer of Occupancy by Tribals to Non-Tribals) Rules, 1975 restricts sale to a non-tribal except where the non-tribal intends to use the land for a non-agricultural purpose. Leasing and mortgaging remain permitted for agricultural use.
  • On 26 May 2025 a Division Bench of the Bombay High Court upheld Rule 4(1)(a) in Mahendarsingh Digvijaysingh Mukne v. State of Maharashtra, Writ Petition No. 2727 of 2018.
  • The petitioner there wanted to sell to a non-tribal tenant family that had worked the land since 1940. The Collector refused because the intended use was agricultural. The High Court did not disturb that.
  • The Court held that individual hardship by itself cannot invalidate a provision enacted for tribal welfare under Article 46, and found no discrimination because a tribal may transfer freely to another tribal.
  • A power of attorney does not solve this. If the underlying transfer needs sanction, dressing it as an agency arrangement changes nothing.

Girish Chhalwani, Founder & CEO, THE EDGE Developments · 20+ years in Maharashtra land acquisition, tenure and NA conversion · 8 min read · Last updated 13 September 2026

If the occupant in the chain of title was a tribal and the transfer to a non-tribal went through without the previous sanction of the Collector under section 36A, the buyer did not acquire the land, and no amount of subsequent paperwork repairs it. This is the most under-checked restriction on tribal land in Maharashtra, and the belt where second homes are being built is exactly the belt where it bites.

What section 36A does

Section 36A of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966 makes the previous sanction of the Collector a condition of transferring occupancy from a tribal to a non-tribal. The word doing the work is previous. Sanction is not a formality obtained afterwards to tidy up a completed sale; it is the thing that makes the transfer capable of happening at all.

The section does not stop tribal occupants from dealing with their land. A tribal may transfer to another tribal without this restriction, and the Bombay High Court has treated that fact as the answer to the argument that the provision discriminates. What the section does is control the exit of land out of tribal ownership.

The 1975 Rules, and the restriction people do not expect

Rule 4(1)(a) of the Maharashtra Land Revenue (Transfer of Occupancy by Tribals to Non-Tribals) Rules, 1975 restricts sale of occupancy to a non-tribal except where the non-tribal intends to use the land for a non-agricultural purpose. Leasing and mortgaging to a non-tribal for agricultural use remain permitted.

Read that carefully, because it inverts what most buyers assume. The buyer who wants to keep farming the land is in a worse position than the buyer who wants to convert it. A family that has cultivated a parcel for three generations and wants to buy it and carry on cultivating is precisely the case the rule blocks.

What Rule 4(1)(a) permits and restricts
Transaction Position under the rule
Tribal to tribal Unrestricted by this rule
Sale to a non-tribal for agricultural use Restricted
Sale to a non-tribal for a non-agricultural purpose Within the exception, still subject to Collector sanction under section 36A
Lease or mortgage to a non-tribal for agricultural use Permitted

The May 2025 judgment, and why it matters now

On 26 May 2025 a Division Bench of the Bombay High Court comprising Justices A. S. Chandurkar and Rajesh S. Patil decided Mahendarsingh Digvijaysingh Mukne v. State of Maharashtra, Writ Petition No. 2727 of 2018, and upheld the validity of Rule 4(1)(a).

The facts are worth stating because they are as sympathetic as such facts get. The petitioner, a tribal, wished to transfer ancestral agricultural land to a non-tribal tenant whose father had worked that property since 1940. The Collector refused permission under Rule 4(1)(a)(i) on the ground that the land would continue to be used for agriculture. The petitioner then challenged the rule itself as constitutionally invalid.

The Court held the rule legally justifiable as a measure preventing non-tribals from accumulating tribal agricultural land, referring to the State’s obligation under Article 46 of the Constitution. It found no discriminatory classification, since tribals retain unrestricted rights of transfer to other tribals. And it recorded that section 36A gives the Collector discretion within the statutory framework without imposing an unreasonable restriction.

Individual hardship by itself cannot be a ground to hold a provision to be invalid.

Bombay High Court, Mahendarsingh Digvijaysingh Mukne v. State of Maharashtra, 26 May 2025

For a buyer, the practical reading is straightforward. Eighty-five years of continuous cultivation by the intending purchaser’s family, an entirely willing tribal seller, and a High Court petition were together not enough. A twelve-month acquaintance and an assurance that it will be sorted out later is not going to be enough either.

How the problem arrives in a title chain

Almost nobody sets out to buy tribal land. The exposure comes in through the chain, and usually in one of these shapes.

  1. An old unsanctioned transfer. A parcel left tribal hands decades ago without sanction, has changed hands twice since, and the current seller is entirely innocent of the history. The defect travels with the land, not with the person.
  2. Sanction that does not match the use. Sanction was granted on a stated non-agricultural purpose that never materialised. The file is clean on its face and the ground contradicts it.
  3. A power of attorney arrangement. The tribal occupant remains on the record while a non-tribal controls, develops and eventually sells the land through an agency document. This is a structure, not a transfer, and it does not survive scrutiny.
  4. Development agreement dressed as a lease. Leasing for agricultural use is permitted, so a long lease is sometimes used to carry what is commercially a sale. The substance is what will be examined.
  5. Partial or informal sanction. An oral assurance, a note on a file, an application made and never decided. None of these is previous sanction.

What to check, and in what order

The tribal land check
Step What you are looking for Where it lives
1. Identify every occupant in the chain Whether any holder was a tribal occupant 7/12, the mutation series, older village records
2. Locate the transfer out of tribal hands The exact entry and its date Ferfar or mutation register
3. Ask for the section 36A sanction order A written order of the Collector, previous to the transfer Collector office record, produced by the seller
4. Read the purpose stated in the sanction Whether the stated non-agricultural purpose was real The order itself, checked against ground use
5. Check the area for Scheduled Area status Additional procedural requirements may apply The applicable notification for the taluka
6. Test any POA or long lease against substance Whether the arrangement is a disguised transfer The instruments, read together

On step 5, there is a further layer worth flagging honestly. A notification dated 14 June 2016 is recorded as modifying the position for section 36A by requiring prior Gram Sabha sanction before the Collector allows a transfer of occupancy from a tribal to a non-tribal. We were not able to retrieve the text of that notification while preparing this article, so treat it as a line of enquiry to confirm with your advocate for the specific taluka rather than as a settled statement of the requirement.

What a buyer should conclude

The restriction is not a technicality that gets waived for a good story, and the May 2025 judgment is recent, considered and unhelpful to anyone hoping otherwise. If the chain runs through a tribal occupant and the sanction order cannot be produced and read, the parcel is not purchasable, whatever the price and whatever the assurance.

The corollary is worth stating too. Where a proper section 36A sanction exists, was previous to the transfer, and matches the actual use, the position is sound and the parcel is not tainted merely by having once been tribal land. The document is the difference.

Frequently asked questions

Can a non-tribal buy tribal land in Maharashtra

Only with the previous sanction of the Collector under section 36A of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, and Rule 4(1)(a) restricts sale to a non-tribal except where the non-tribal intends non-agricultural use.

What is section 36A

The provision of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966 that makes the previous sanction of the Collector a condition of transferring occupancy held by a tribal to a non-tribal.

What happens if I already bought without sanction

The transfer is not valid merely because it was registered, paid for and followed by possession. The defect attaches to the land and passes down the chain, so take advice on the specific chain rather than assuming time has cured it.

Does a power of attorney solve the problem

No. If the underlying transaction is a transfer requiring sanction, structuring it as an agency arrangement does not change what it is.

Can a tribal sell to another tribal

Yes. The Bombay High Court treated the unrestricted right of transfer between tribals as the reason the restriction is not discriminatory.

Did the Bombay High Court strike down the restriction

No. On 26 May 2025 in Mahendarsingh Digvijaysingh Mukne v. State of Maharashtra the Court upheld Rule 4(1)(a), holding that individual hardship by itself cannot invalidate a provision enacted for tribal welfare.

Buying in the Sahyadri or Palghar belt? Ask for the section 36A sanction order before anything else. If it cannot be produced and read, the price is irrelevant.

Talk to THE EDGE

Related reading

Citations and sources

  • Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966, section 36A — text
  • Maharashtra Land Revenue (Transfer of Occupancy by Tribals to Non-Tribals) Rules, 1975, Rule 4(1)(a) — bare rules
  • Mahendarsingh Digvijaysingh Mukne v. State of Maharashtra, Writ Petition No. 2727 of 2018, Bombay High Court, 26 May 2025, Chandurkar and Rajesh S. Patil JJ — case report
  • Notification dated 14 June 2016 on modifications to section 36A requiring prior Gram Sabha sanction — listed on the Raj Bhavan Maharashtra document index, but the document page redirected and could not be read in preparing this article. Verify before relying on it

A long tree-lined approach road with mature avenue trees leading toward the entrance of a gated plotted land estate.
CategoriesLand Investment

Legal Access and Right of Way: How to Prove a Plot Actually Has an Approach Road

By Girish Chhalwani,

TL;DR

  • Driving to the plot proves a track exists. It does not prove you have a legal right to use it, and those are different things with different prices.
  • Section 20 of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966 declares public roads, lanes and paths to be the property of the State Government, subject to lawful existing rights. A path that is on the record is durable. A path that is only on the ground is not.
  • Section 143 of the Code is headed right of way over boundaries, which is the statutory hook for access disputes between neighbouring holdings.
  • Access that runs across a neighbour’s private field on goodwill fails the moment the field is sold, partitioned or fenced. Goodwill is not an interest in land.
  • No legal approach means no building permission, no institutional lending on normal terms, and an exit priced by whoever owns the land you have to cross.
  • The check is a map question, a record question and a site question, in that order. Doing it on site alone is how buyers get caught.

Girish Chhalwani, Founder & CEO, THE EDGE Developments · 20+ years in Maharashtra land acquisition, tenure and NA conversion · 7 min read · Last updated 13 September 2026

A plot has legal access when there is a recorded public way reaching its boundary, or a registered right over private land that survives the sale of that land, and nothing short of that counts. Everything else, the mud track everyone uses, the neighbour who has never objected, the gap in the bund that has been there for thirty years, is a licence that can be withdrawn. The right of way question is where a technically clean title quietly loses most of its value.

Why this is the defect buyers miss

Access fails silently. There is no adverse entry on the 7/12 that says this parcel cannot be reached, no notice, no dispute on file, nothing for a title search to report. The seller drives you in, you arrive, and the question never forms. It forms later, when a neighbour puts up a fence, or a family partition puts a new owner on the crossing field, or the panchayat is asked to certify access for a building permission and cannot.

By then the negotiating position has inverted completely. The owner of the crossing land knows your plot is worth a great deal more with access than without it, and prices accordingly.

The three kinds of access, and what each is worth

Access types ranked by what they survive
Type What it looks like Survives a sale of the crossing land Supports a building permission
Recorded public way A road, lane or path shown on the village map and in the record Yes Yes, subject to width and other norms
Registered right over private land An easement or right of way created by a registered instrument, described by boundaries and width Yes, it binds successors Usually, if the width is adequate
Permission or long use The neighbour has always allowed it. There is a track. Nothing is written No No

Most rural plots in the Karjat, Khalapur, Murbad and Konkan belt are sold on the third row while the buyer believes they are getting the first.

What section 20 gives you, and what it does not

Section 20 of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966 declares that all public roads, lanes and paths, together with bridges, ditches, dikes and fences and various water bodies and unoccupied lands, are the property of the State Government, subject to the rights of individuals and of the public that lawfully exist.

That is a strong protection when the way you rely on is one of those public roads, lanes or paths, because it is not in anyone’s private gift to close. The section also supplies machinery for contested cases: the Collector or a survey officer may determine claims of private right through a formal inquiry with notice to interested parties, and that determination carries appeal and revision routes under the Code.

What section 20 does not do is create a way where none is recorded. If the village map shows no path reaching your boundary, the section has nothing to attach to.

Alongside it, section 143 of the Code is headed right of way over boundaries. That heading is the statutory pointer for access as between neighbouring holdings, and it is the provision an advocate will work from when the dispute is between two private parcels rather than about a public path.

All public roads, lanes and paths, the bridges, ditches, dikes and fences are and are hereby declared to be the property of the State Government.

Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966, section 20

The check, in the order that actually finds problems

  1. Start with the village map, not the site. Trace a continuous recorded way from the nearest public road to the boundary of the survey number. If the line breaks, you have found the issue before spending a rupee on travel.
  2. Compare the map to the cadastral boundary plan. A path that exists in the village map but runs somewhere other than where the track runs today is a common and expensive mismatch.
  3. Identify every parcel the access crosses and pull its 7/12. You need to know who owns the crossing land, how many co-owners there are, and whether any of them is a minor, absent or in dispute. Access held at the pleasure of nine co-owners is not access.
  4. Ask for the registered instrument, if the answer is a private right. Read it for width, for the described boundaries, and for whether it binds successors in title. An unregistered letter of no objection is not a right.
  5. Check the width against what you intend to build. Access adequate for a bullock cart is not access adequate for a sanctioned layout, a fire tender or a concrete mixer, and the permission stage is where that surfaces.
  6. Walk it in the monsoon, or ask someone who has. A track along a nala bank or across a seasonal crossing is legally fine and practically useless for four months of the year.
  7. Only then, drive it. The site visit confirms what the record told you. It is a poor place to start.

What goes wrong when access is only informal

Consequences of an unrecorded approach
Stage What happens
Building permission The sanctioning authority needs an approach of adequate width. An informal track does not satisfy it, so the file stops
Institutional finance Lenders treat inaccessible land as poor security. Terms worsen or the proposal is declined
Construction Material movement depends on a neighbour’s continued goodwill, which is worth least exactly when you need it most
Resale A diligent buyer finds what you did not, and reprices. An undiligent one buys your problem and later becomes your dispute
Litigation Access suits are slow and are usually settled by paying the crossing owner, which is the outcome the buyer was trying to avoid

The farm-road route, and its limits

Maharashtra has a live administrative push on farm access road records, which is a genuine improvement for agricultural holdings and is worth understanding before assuming a parcel is landlocked forever. Recording a farm access route in the revenue record moves an informal path toward the first row of the table above.

Two limits are worth stating plainly. It is an administrative process with its own timeline, so it is not a substitute for having access at the point of purchase. And a route recorded for agricultural access is not automatically an approach that will satisfy a sanctioning authority for a plotted layout or a residential building. Buying on the assumption that either will follow is buying an outcome you do not control.

Frequently asked questions

What counts as legal access to a plot in Maharashtra

A recorded public road, lane or path reaching the boundary, or a registered right of way over private land that binds successors in title. A track used by permission is neither.

Does long use of a track give me a right of way

Not reliably, and not in a form a buyer should pay for. Long use may support a claim in litigation, but you are buying a lawsuit rather than an approach road.

Can a neighbour close the path I use to reach my land

If the path is a recorded public lane or path, section 20 of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code puts it beyond a private party to close. If it crosses private land on permission, yes, and a sale or partition of that land is the usual trigger.

Will I get building permission without a recorded approach road

Generally no. The sanctioning authority needs an approach of adequate width, and an informal track does not satisfy that requirement.

How wide does the approach need to be

It depends on what is being sanctioned, so check the applicable norm for the specific development before assuming an existing track is sufficient. Cart-width access is rarely enough for a layout.

What should I ask the seller for

The village map showing the way to the boundary, the 7/12 of every parcel the access crosses, and the registered instrument if the access depends on private land. Anything less is a licence.

About to buy a plot you have only ever reached by following the seller? We trace access on the record before the site visit, because that is the order in which the problem is cheap to find.

Talk to THE EDGE

Related reading

Citations and sources

  • Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966, section 20 — government title to public roads, lanes, paths and unoccupied lands, and the inquiry machinery for competing private claims. Read the Code (PDF)
  • Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966, section 143 — headed right of way over boundaries. The section heading is verified; the full operative text was not re-read in preparing this article and should be read with an advocate before relying on it in a specific dispute
  • Indian Easements Act, 1882 — the general law under which easements of necessity and registered rights of way are claimed. Named here for orientation, not relied on for any specific proposition

A weathered wooden fence marking a rural boundary with an unfinished brick wall built across it into the adjoining green field.
CategoriesLand Investment

Gairan Land in Maharashtra: Why Encroached Village Commons Never Get Clean Title

By Girish Chhalwani,

TL;DR

  • Gairan is village grazing land. It is not private land that happens to be vacant, and it is not gaothan, which is the settlement area meant for housing.
  • Section 20 of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966 declares public roads, lanes, paths and unoccupied lands to be the property of the State Government, subject to existing lawful rights.
  • In Jagpal Singh v. State of Punjab the Supreme Court directed every state to prepare schemes for eviction of encroachments on village common land, with a narrow exception for landless labourers and persons belonging to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. Maharashtra issued a notification on 12 July 2011.
  • As of September 2022 the State recorded roughly 222,153 illegal constructions on about 10,089 hectares of gairan. Between July 2011 and September 2022 some 24,513 were removed.
  • Around 12,652 encroachments were regularised before July 2011. That earlier window is what people point to when they claim a parcel can be regularised now. It generally cannot.
  • Long possession does not ripen into title against the State here, and a village-level receipt or a panchayat entry proves nothing about ownership.

Girish Chhalwani, Founder & CEO, THE EDGE Developments · 20+ years in Maharashtra land acquisition, tenure and NA conversion · 7 min read · Last updated 13 September 2026

Gairan land is Government property, and thirty years of undisturbed possession, a hut, a fence, a crop and a village receipt do not turn it into anything else. The mistake buyers make is to treat visible, peaceful, uncontested occupation as evidence of ownership. On village commons it is evidence of encroachment, and the State has counted it.

What gairan actually is

Gairan is land reserved for common grazing, held for the village as a whole rather than by any person in it. Under the framework of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966 it sits with a class of land that is not available for private appropriation, and it is routinely confused with two other things it is not.

Three categories that look similar on the ground and behave nothing alike
Category What it is Can it be privately owned
Gairan Village common grazing land No. Government property. Occupation is encroachment
Gaothan The village settlement area, meant for residential use Yes, within the settlement framework applicable to it
Private agricultural land lying fallow Privately owned land not currently cultivated Yes. Ownership is unaffected by non-use

The practical tell is that gairan tends to be the unfenced, unbunded, lightly grazed ground at the edge of the settlement, often on the slope or the plateau shoulder, precisely the ground a buyer looking for a view finds attractive and cheap.

The statutory position

Section 20 of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966 declares that all public roads, lanes and paths, the bridges, ditches, dikes and fences, together with various water bodies and unoccupied lands, are the property of the State Government, subject to the rights of individuals and the public that lawfully exist.

The section is not merely declaratory. It also provides the machinery: the Collector or a survey officer may resolve competing claims of private right through a formal inquiry with notice to interested parties, and that decision carries appeal and revision routes under the Code. So a person asserting a private right in what the record shows as government land has a forum. What they do not have is a presumption in their favour.

The Supreme Court changed the enforcement climate

In Jagpal Singh v. State of Punjab the Supreme Court directed all states to prepare schemes for the rapid removal of encroachments on village common land, allowing an exception for landless labourers and persons belonging to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. That judgment is the reason enforcement stopped being episodic.

Maharashtra responded with a Government notification dated 12 July 2011 reaffirming the protection of common lands from encroachment. The date matters more than it looks, because it splits the history of every gairan parcel in the State into a before and an after.

Official surveys do not always show the real picture.

Down To Earth, reporting on gairan encroachment in Maharashtra

The numbers, which are unusually specific

Maharashtra has counted this problem in a way most states have not, and the figures are worth carrying into any negotiation.

Gairan encroachment in Maharashtra, as reported
Measure Figure As at
Illegal constructions on gairan approximately 222,153 September 2022
Area under encroachment approximately 10,089 hectares September 2022
Encroachments removed since the July 2011 notification 24,513 July 2011 to September 2022
Encroachments regularised before July 2011 12,652 Pre July 2011

Two things fall out of that table. First, the removed number is roughly a tenth of the standing number, so most encroachments have not yet been touched, which is exactly why sellers can say with a straight face that nobody has ever been evicted here. Second, the regularised number belongs to a window that closed. It is the historical basis for the pitch that a parcel can be regularised, and that pitch is generally no longer available.

Enforcement is real where it lands. In November 2022 more than 240 households in Pimpri Budruk were served demolition notices, in a village where over 59 hectares are classified as gairan.

Why the pitch is so persuasive

The sales story around gairan land is well worn and internally consistent, which is what makes it dangerous. It usually runs through some combination of the following.

  1. The family has been here for forty years. True, and irrelevant. Adverse possession does not run against the State in the way it runs between private parties, and long occupation of common land remains encroachment.
  2. The panchayat has issued a receipt, so it is recognised. A tax or fee receipt records a payment. It is not a title document and no panchayat can convey Government land.
  3. Electricity and water are connected. Utility connections follow occupation, not ownership. They are frequently cited and prove nothing about title.
  4. Others nearby were regularised. Almost always a reference to the pre-2011 window, or to a case with facts that do not transfer, such as an eligible occupant under the narrow Jagpal Singh exception.
  5. It will be regularised soon, a scheme is coming. Treat any unnotified future scheme as worth nothing at the price you are being asked to pay today.

What to check before you go further

  1. Read the class of land on the 7/12, not just the ownership column. Government-held categories are visible if you look for them rather than skimming to the name.
  2. Pull the village map and see where the parcel sits. Gairan is generally identifiable on the village map, and its boundaries rarely match the fence you are shown.
  3. Ask for the record of rights history rather than the current page. If a private name was entered on what was common land, the entry usually has a story, and the story is usually the problem.
  4. Check for pending encroachment or eviction proceedings. Ongoing action against neighbouring plots is the strongest available signal.
  5. Treat any claim of regularisation as requiring a document. Ask for the specific order. If it is pre-2011, understand it does not extend to this parcel.
  6. If the seller cannot produce a chain that predates the classification, stop. There is no way to buy your way out of Government title.

The honest exception

The Jagpal Singh direction did carve out landless labourers and persons belonging to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes from the general eviction requirement. That exception exists for a social purpose and is worth stating accurately rather than pretending the position is uniformly absolute. But it protects an occupant in defined circumstances. It does not create a marketable title, and it is not a route by which a buyer from outside the village acquires anything.

Frequently asked questions

Can I buy gairan land in Maharashtra

No. Gairan is village common grazing land held as Government property. A seller in occupation has possession, not ownership, and cannot convey title.

Is gairan the same as gaothan

No. Gaothan is the village settlement area intended for residential use. Gairan is common grazing land. They are different categories with entirely different consequences for a buyer.

Can long possession of gairan become ownership

No. Occupation of village common land remains encroachment however long it has continued, and the Supreme Court in Jagpal Singh v. State of Punjab directed states to prepare schemes for removing such encroachments.

Can gairan encroachment be regularised today

Generally no. Around 12,652 encroachments were regularised before July 2011, and that window is what sellers point to. Anyone claiming current regularisation should be asked to produce the specific order.

Does a panchayat receipt prove ownership of a plot

No. A receipt records a payment. A panchayat cannot convey Government land, and utility connections follow occupation rather than title.

How much gairan land in Maharashtra is under encroachment

The State recorded roughly 222,153 illegal constructions covering about 10,089 hectares as of September 2022, of which some 24,513 had been removed since the July 2011 notification.

Being shown a cheap parcel at the edge of a village? That is where gairan sits. We check the class of land before anything else, because nothing downstream matters if the answer is Government.

Talk to THE EDGE

Related reading

Citations and sources

  • Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966, section 20 — government title to public roads, paths and unoccupied lands
  • Jagpal Singh v. State of Punjab, Supreme Court of India, 2011 — direction to states to frame schemes for removal of encroachments on village common land
  • Government of Maharashtra notification dated 12 July 2011 on protection of village common lands
  • Down To Earth, Gairan land encroachment in Maharashtra — State figures as at September 2022

Aerial view of green agricultural fields surrounding a small farmhouse in rural Maharashtra
CategoriesLand Investment Market Insights Mumbai 3.0 NRI Guides tips & tricks Uncategorized Weekend Homes

Maharashtra NA Conversion Rules 2026: One-Time Premium Under MLRC Section 47 Explained

By Girish Chhalwani,

TL;DR — Key Takeaways

  • Maharashtra has replaced the recurring annual non-agricultural (NA) assessment with a one-time premium on conversion, under a substituted Section 47 of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966.
  • The change comes through the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code (Second Amendment) Act, 2025, in force from 31 December 2025, with an implementing Government Resolution dated 10 February 2026.
  • The one-time premium is 0.10% / 0.25% / 0.50% of the Annual Statement of Rates (ASR) market value, by plot size.
  • Where the intended use is already permissible under the Development Plan or Regional Plan, a separate NA permission (sanad) from the Collector is no longer required.
  • The reform does not convert Occupancy Class II or restricted-tenure land into Class I — tenure conditions still apply separately.

By Girish Chhalwani, Founder & CEO, THE EDGE Developments · 20+ years in Maharashtra land · Reading time: ~7 minutes · Last updated: 13 August 2026

What are Maharashtra’s new NA conversion rules in 2026?

Direct answer: From 31 December 2025, Maharashtra charges a single one-time premium when agricultural land is put to non-agricultural use, instead of the old annual NA assessment that landowners paid year after year. The switch was made by the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code (Second Amendment) Act, 2025, which substituted Section 47 of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966 (MLRC), and is being rolled out through a Government Resolution of the Revenue and Forest Department dated 10 February 2026.

For plotted-land buyers and investors across the Mumbai Metropolitan Region (MMR) and the rest of Maharashtra, this is one of the most consequential land-revenue reforms in years. It changes how NA cost is calculated, when it is paid, and whether you need a separate Collector permission at all. It does not, however, erase the older tenure and industrial-use rules that still decide whether you can buy a particular parcel in the first place.

Before vs after: recurring NA assessment vs the one-time premium

The clearest way to understand the reform is a side-by-side of the old regime and the new one.

Feature Before (until 30 Dec 2025) After (MLRC Second Amendment Act, 2025)
NA charge type Recurring annual non-agricultural assessment One-time premium at conversion
Basis of charge Periodic assessment rates set by revenue authorities Percentage of ASR market value, by plot area
Separate NA permission (sanad) Required from the Collector before use Not required where the use is permissible under the Development Plan / Regional Plan
Ongoing liability Continued every year the land stayed NA None after the one-time premium is paid

In short: the state has moved from taxing NA land repeatedly to charging once, and it has folded the fiscal step into the planning-permission process rather than keeping it as a separate revenue hurdle.

How much is the one-time NA premium?

Direct answer: The one-time premium is a percentage of the land’s market value as per the Annual Statement of Rates (ASR) published under the Maharashtra Stamp (Determination of True Market Value of Property) Rules, 1995 — and the percentage rises with plot size.

Plot area One-time premium (of ASR market value)
Up to 1,000 sq. m. 0.10%
1,001 to 4,000 sq. m. 0.25%
Above 4,000 sq. m. 0.50%

Notably, the amended Section 47 does not set different premium rates for Occupancy Class I land versus other classes of occupancy — the rate depends on the area of the plot, not its tenure category. For land already converted before the amendment, the law provides a transitional one-time premium in lieu of the annual assessment, calculated on the ASR of 2001 (for conversions on or before 31 December 2001) or of the year of conversion (for conversions on or after 1 January 2002).

Do you still need a separate NA permission from the Collector?

Direct answer: In most planned areas, no. Where a parcel falls within a sanctioned Development Plan or Regional Plan and the proposed use is permissible there, the amendment dispenses with the earlier requirement of a separate NA permission (sanad) from the Collector. The one-time premium is instead collected before the planning authority grants development permission — integrating the fiscal step into the building-permission workflow.

This is the practical heart of the “ease of doing business” pitch behind the reform: fewer desks, one payment, and development permission that no longer waits on a second, standalone conversion order.

Occupancy Class I vs Class II: what has NOT changed

Direct answer: The premium reform is about NA cost and process — it does not upgrade your tenure. Granting development permission does not, by itself, convert non-Class I land into Class I occupancy, and the restrictions attached to Class II or other restricted-tenure land continue to operate independently.

  • Occupancy Class I — effectively freehold; the holder has full transfer rights, and NA use follows the new one-time-premium route directly.
  • Occupancy Class II / restricted tenure — land granted on restricted terms (for example, certain government-allotted, tenancy-derived or Bhogvata-2 lands). These carry their own conditions, and any required no-objection or separate premium payable to the government for tenure purposes is not waived by the NA reform.

The takeaway for buyers: the new premium simplifies NA, but you must still read the 7/12 extract, the tenure class and any conditions endorsed on it. Our 12 red flags to check before you buy a plot in MMR covers exactly these title-and-tenure checks.

Where does the MTAL Act fit in?

The Maharashtra Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 (MTAL) governs who may buy agricultural land and on what terms — a separate question from how NA cost is charged under the MLRC. Two long-standing MTAL rules still matter alongside the 2025 reform:

  • Bona fide industrial use (Section 63-1A): a non-agriculturist may purchase agricultural land for a bona fide industrial use, subject to putting the land to that use within a fixed period (with a limited extension available on payment of a cess), failing which the concession can be lost.
  • Agriculturist restriction (Section 63): the general bar on transfer of agricultural land to a non-agriculturist without permission continues to apply outside the specific industrial-use and planning-area routes.

In other words, the MLRC change lowers the NA cost and paperwork; the MTAL Act still decides eligibility to buy. Treat them as two gates, not one. Both were consolidated in the official MTAL text as updated to 27 November 2025 on the Maharashtra Law and Judiciary Department portal.

What happens if the one-time premium is not paid?

Direct answer: Where a premium (including the regularisation premium for previously converted land) is not paid within the prescribed period — one year in the regularisation route — it becomes recoverable with penalty and interest, as arrears of land revenue, and any waiver benefit tied to timely payment is forfeited.

We have seen commentary suggesting steep multiples for non-compliance. We have not found a specific, verifiable “five times the premium” figure in the primary Act text or the 10 February 2026 GR, so we do not state one here. What is confirmed is the recovery-as-arrears mechanism and loss of waiver — treat the one-year clock as real and do not miss it.

Step-by-step: NA use under the 2026 regime

  1. Confirm the plan status. Check whether the parcel is inside a sanctioned Development Plan or Regional Plan and whether your intended use is permissible there.
  2. Verify tenure. Read the 7/12 extract for Occupancy Class (I vs II) and any endorsed conditions; resolve Class II / restricted-tenure requirements separately.
  3. Clear MTAL eligibility. Confirm you are entitled to buy — via agriculturist status, the industrial-use route, or the applicable planning-area exemption.
  4. Compute the premium. Apply 0.10% / 0.25% / 0.50% of ASR market value by plot area.
  5. Pay before permission. The one-time premium is collected ahead of the planning authority’s development permission.
  6. Keep the record. Retain proof of payment and the permission; watch the one-year clock on any regularisation premium.

“For two decades, annual NA assessment was a quiet, recurring drag on land ownership in Maharashtra. Moving to a one-time premium and folding it into development permission is a genuine simplification — but it rewards diligence, not shortcuts. The tenure class and the MTAL eligibility gate still decide whether a parcel is even buyable. At THE EDGE Developments we underwrite both before we call a plot investable.”

— Girish Chhalwani, Founder & CEO, THE EDGE Developments

Because the premium is pegged to ASR market value, it also interacts with your total acquisition cost — read it alongside our 2026 breakdown of stamp duty and registration charges on land in Maharashtra. And if you are buying in the NAINA belt, where large tracts are converting to planned use, see Third Mumbai and NAINA explained for how the airport city is resetting land values.

Frequently asked questions

What is the new one-time NA premium in Maharashtra

It is a single, upfront charge payable when agricultural land is put to non-agricultural use, introduced by the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code (Second Amendment) Act, 2025. It replaces the earlier annual NA assessment and is set at 0.10%, 0.25% or 0.50% of the ASR market value depending on plot size.

When did the MLRC Second Amendment Act 2025 take effect

The Act received the Governor’s assent and came into force on 31 December 2025. An implementing Government Resolution of the Revenue and Forest Department, dated 10 February 2026, sets out how the new one-time premium and permission process operate in practice.

Do I still need a separate NA permission or sanad from the Collector

In most cases, no. Where the land falls within a sanctioned Development Plan or Regional Plan and the intended use is permissible there, a separate NA permission from the Collector is no longer required. The one-time premium is collected before the planning authority grants development permission.

Does the new rule apply to Occupancy Class II or restricted-tenure land

The premium reform applies to NA use, but it does not upgrade tenure. Development permission does not convert non-Class I land into Class I, and Class II or restricted-tenure conditions — including any separate no-objection or tenure premium — continue to apply independently.

What happens if the one-time premium is not paid on time

An unpaid premium is recoverable with penalty and interest as arrears of land revenue, and any waiver linked to timely payment is lost. In the regularisation route for previously converted land, the prescribed window is one year, so the clock should not be missed.

Buying plotted land in MMR or Maharashtra?

THE EDGE Developments underwrites tenure class, MTAL eligibility and NA premium exposure before we call a plot investable. Talk to our Land Intelligence team before you commit.

Speak to THE EDGE →

Related reading

Disclaimer: This article is for general information only and is not legal or tax advice. Land-revenue rules, premium rates and tenure conditions vary by parcel and are subject to change; the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code (Second Amendment) Act, 2025 and the Government Resolution dated 10 February 2026 should be read in full, and specific parcels verified against the 7/12 extract and Collector records. Consult a qualified advocate and your local revenue office before transacting. Verified against sources current to August 2026.

Citations & sources

  • Mondaq — “Maharashtra Abolishes Annual Non-Agricultural Tax: Transition To One-Time Premium Model Under The Maharashtra Land Revenue Code (Second Amendment) Act, 2025”: read here.
  • Law Web — “New NA Permission Regime in Maharashtra: What the 2025 MLRC Amendment and 10 February 2026 GR Mean for Landowners”: read here.
  • EQ Magazine — “Maharashtra Land Revenue Code (Second Amendment) Act, 2025: Streamlining non-agricultural land conversion”: read here.
  • Maharashtra Law & Judiciary Department — official text, “The Maharashtra Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act (as on 27 November 2025)”: read here.
  • India Code — “Maharashtra Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act” (primary statute): read here.

—

# JSON-LD @graph (place inside a single <script type=”application/ld+json”> block in the post)

Related land-policy updates from THE EDGE