If the land is less than 0.6 hectares, the building area should not be more than 150 sq ft. If the land is more than 0.6 hectares, the building area should not exceed one-fourth of the land area or 400 sq ft

Maximum built-up area: Usually 10% of the total land area. Maximum height allowed: Typically 2 floors (Ground + 1) Minimum setback requirements: 15-20 feet from boundaries.In UP 

COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE B.S.PATIL
W.P.No.46912/2016 (KLR-RES) DATED:[deleted]
G.S. SIDDARAJU, S/ O B. SIDDALINGAPPA VS. STATE OF KARNATAKA, REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,
REVENUE DEPARTMENT, M.S.BUILDING, BENGALURU-560 001 AND OTHERS.
ORDER
1. In this writ petition, petitioner is challenging the order dated 05.07.2016 passed by respondent No.3
Tahsildar,-Davangere.By the said order, the Tahsildar, in exercise of powers under Section 95 of the Karnataka
Land Revenue Act, 1964 (for short, ' the Act '), has directed that the construction made by petitioner herein of
a building in the lands bearing R.S.No.58 measuring 3 acres 12 guntas and R.S.No.59/P2-P1 measuring 2 acres
6 guntas situated in Avaragere Village, Kasaba Hobli, Davangere Taluk, shall be demolished after taking
necessary approval from the Deputy Commissioner, Davangere District.It is further directed that expenses to
be incurred for removal of the structure shall be recovered from the petitioner after obtaining necessary
permission from the Deputy Commissioner, Davangere.The Tahsildar has also directed both parties to
maintain status-quo regarding the property in question till the dispute with regard to their title and interest
over the property in question was decided by the Civil Court.
2. Facts, as narrated in the memorandum of writ petition, disclose that petitioner claims to be the owner in
possession and enjoyment of the property in question.He has constructed a building in a portion of
agricultural lands allegedly as a farm house.The Tahsildar issued notice dated 17.08.2015 to the petitioner
alleging that he had violated the provisions of Section 95 ( 2) of the Act because construction put up by him
was not of a farm house, but of a huge building for purposes other than agriculture.
3. An order had been passed on 01.09.2015 in similar terms as has been done now under the impugned
order.The same was challenged before this Court in W.P.Nos.41416/2015 & 41784/2015.This Court disposed
of the said writ petitions on 01.10.2015 observing that petitioner had to prefer an appeal under Section 49 of
the Act. W.A.Nos.4356/2015 & 4524/2015 were filed against the same.The Division Bench of this Court set
aside the order passed by the Tahsildar and remitted the matter to the Tahsildar for consideration afresh and
directed the parties to maintain status-quo with regard to change in the nature and character of the property
in dispute till the matter was considered by the Tahsildar.
The Tahsildar was directed not to prevent the petitioner from entering into the farm house already
constructed on the land.This is how the Tahsidlar has considered the matter afresh and has passed the
impugned order.
4. As per the findings recorded by the Tahsildar, although petitioner had asserted before him that construction
put up in the land in question was that of a farm house, report secured by the Tahsidlar from different
authorities such as the Assistant Executive Engineer, Public Works Department and the Assistant Director of
Agriculture, Department of Agriculture disclosed that size of the construction was 150 X 50 sq.mtrs.and the
approximate cost of construction was around rupees twenty two lakhs and therefore, such a building could
not have been constructed in the agricultural land and hence, it had to be regarded as illegal construction put
up without getting the land converted as required under Section 95 of the Act.
5. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner contends that the Tahsildar obtained report from the Public
Works Department and Department of Agriculture behind the back of the petitioner and none of the reports
relied upon were furnished to the petitioner to have his say in the matter.
He further points out that merely because construction was relatively huge, it could not be contended that it
ceased to be a farm house.
6. It is contended that as long as the construction put up is for the purpose of the farmer to enable him to
carry on his agricultural activities in the farm land, no matter whether it is a smaller construction or bigger
one, it does not lose the characteristic feature of a farm house.
7. Sri S.V.Angadi, learned counsel appearing for impleading applicant in I.A.1/2016 submits that petitioner has
been illegally enjoying the property without parting with the requisite share which the impleading applicant is
legally entitled as per the judgment and decree passed by the Civil Court.He submits that petitioner is unjustly
enriching himself by enjoying the properties including the subject lands with utter disregard to the judgment
rendered by the Civil Court.
8. Learned Additional Government Advocate points out that as per Section 95 ( 1) of the Act, erection of
building for better cultivation of the agricultural land or for its more convenient use, though permissible, in
terms of the proviso to sub-section.
(1) of Section 95 of the Act and the explanation appended thereto, the farm building or farm house, so erected
shall not be more than 10% of his holding and that farm house or farm building means a house attached to a
farm and construction in a portion of agricultural land, used for the residence of the agriculturist or used for
the purpose of keeping agricultural equipments and tethering cattle. The house shall be used by farmer for his
own use and it shall not be let out for commercial activities to any individual or agency.
9. In the light of the above, I have examined the contentions urged by all the parties and also the entire matter
in detail. Sub-section ( 1) of Section 95 of the Act which is relevant for the present purpose can be usefully
extracted as under:
" Subject to any law for the time being in force regarding erection of buildings or construction of wells or
tanks, an occupant of land assessed or held for the purpose of agriculture is entitled by himself, his servants,
tenants, agents, or other legal representatives, to erect farm buildings, construct wells or tanks, or make any
other improvements thereon for the better cultivation of the land or its more convenient use for the purpose
aforesaid:
Provided that the farm Building or farm House so erected shall not be more than ten per cent of his holding
subject to maximum of such extent of land as may be prescribed. "
10. Section 96 of the Act provides for imposition of penalty for using agricultural land for other purposes
without permission. Sub-section ( 1) of Section 96 of the Act reads as under:
" If any land assessed or held for the purpose of agriculture be diverted or used for any other purpose without
the permission of the Deputy Commissioner, or before the expiry of the period prescribed in sub-section ( 5)
of Section 95, the Deputy Commissioner may summarily evict the occupant and the person responsible for the
diversion from the land so diverted and any building or other construction erected thereon shall also, if not
removed after such written notice as the Deputy Commissioner may deem reasonable, be liable for forfeiture
or to summary removal. The occupant and the person responsible for the diversion shall also be liable to pay,
such penalty not exceeding one thousand rupees as the Deputy Commissioner may, subject to the rules made
by the State Government in this behalf, direct. "
Rule 107- A of the Karnataka Land Revenue Rules, 1966 makes provision for payment of amount for
compounding, in case of diversion of agricultural lands for non-agricultural use.
11. It is thus clear that an agriculturist can erect building in his agricultural land for its more convenient use or
better cultivation, provided such farm building or farm house so erected is not more than 10% of his holding
subject to maximum of such extent of land as may be prescribed. No Rule prescribing any maximum extent of
land on which such building can be erected is brought to the notice of the Court. Therefore, proviso which
says that the farm building or farm house so erected shall not be more than 10% of his holding has to be kept
in mind while examining whether the house constructed is in the nature of a farm house or it loses its
characteristic feature of a farm house. In other words, if the farmer has got 10 acres of land, he cannot be
found fault with for putting up construction utilizing a bigger area in his agricultural land, say up to 1 acre
provided he uses such construction for his own residence for the purpose of agricultural operations, tethering
of cattle or for storing agricultural implements or products including for residence of himself and his family
members, his servants and dependents.
12. If the agricultural land is so required to be used for erecting a farm house or farm building, then the
agriculturist is not required to file an application seeking conversion of land as contemplated under sub-
section ( 2) of Section 95.
13. In the instant case, the Tahsildar has proceeded on the basis of the report obtained from the Public Works
Department and Department of Agriculture wherein it has been allegedly stated that petitioner had
constructed a huge building by spending about rupees twenty two lakhs apparently for subjecting it to
commercial use and therefore, it could not be regarded as a farm house. This finding recorded by the
Tahsildar is not preceded by a fair and reasonable opportunity given to the petitioner by supplying copies of
the reports obtained from the Assistant Executive Engineer of Public Works Department and Assistant Director
of Agriculture of Agriculture Department. It is well established that if a quasi judicial authority wants to place
reliance on any report which is adverse to the interest of the petitioner, then the affected person (petitioner
herein) shall be furnished with copies of such reports and shall be provided an opportunity to rebut the
contents thereof. Such a procedure has not been followed in the instant case.
14. Merely because the construction put up is a bigger one, it cannot be held that the construction loses the
characteristic of a farm building unless it falls within the mischief of proviso to sub-section ( 1) of Section 95 of
the Act which states that such farm building or farm house erected shall not be more than 10% of his holding
or that it does not satisfy the explanation appended to sub-section ( 1) of Section 95 of the Act which states
that farm building or a farm house means a house attached to a farm and construction made in a portion of
agricultural land, used for the residence of the agriculturist or used for the purpose of keeping agricultural
equipments and tethering cattle or that the house shall be used by farmer for his own use and shall not be let
out for commercial activities to any individual or agency.
15. There is no finding recorded in the instant case that construction put up has been let out either for
commercial use to any other person or agency. In such circumstances, the Tahsildar was not right and justified
in making an inference based on the structure put up that as the building was bigger one, it could not be
regarded as a farm house/building. In addition, the Tahsildar was not right and justified in directing the parties
to maintain status-quo till disposal of the civil suit. It is for the authorities to work out their remedies in the
pending civil suit and not for the Tahsildar to pass an order directing the parties to maintain status-quo during
the pendency of the civil suit.
16. In the instant case, it is pointed out that a decree has been passed declaring the right of the impleading
applicant in the family properties and for allotment of her share as back as in the year 1972.It is also pointed
out by Sri Angadi, learned counsel appearing for the impleading applicant that till today impleading applicant
has not been able to secure the fruits of the decree. Learned counsel for the petitioner points out that appeal
filed against the decree is pending before this Court.If that is so, both parties are well advised to expedite the
said appeal or request the Court to refer the matter for mediation so that long standing litigation c

agriculture" includes horticulture, animal husbandry, forestry, dairy and poultry farming, pisciculture, and other allied activities, whether or not undertaken jointly with agriculture and the expression "agricultural operations" shall be construed accordingly.

No further query raised 

Permissible limits for constructing a structure on agricultural land vary by location and type of structure: 

Built-up area: Usually 10% of the total land area 

Height: Typically 2 floors (ground + 1) 

Setback requirements: Usually 15-20 feet from boundaries 

Land size: For example, in Goa, the land must be at least 10,000 square meters 

Built-up area: For example, in Goa, the maximum built-up area is 500 square meters.

Minimum Area: For construction, the minimum area of agricultural holding must be at least 0.4 hectares (1 acre). If the holding exceeds 0.6 hectares, the total built-up area of all buildings cannot exceed 400 square meters or one-quarter of the holding area, whichever is less.

You may go through the judgement rendered income tax appellate tribunal Delhi in 

MV CHANDRASEKHAR (HUF) Vs. Asst  CIT, Circle 4(1) on 29.9.2005

For details.

Agriculture is a broader term that includes agricultural activities, as well as other related activities.
Income-producing activities that are characterized by crop cultivation. Agricultural activities include farming, which is the practice of cultivating crops and raising animals for food, fiber, and other agricultural purposes.
Farming activity refers to the process of cultivating land for the purpose of producing crops or livestock. On the other hand, non-farming activity refers to any economic activity that is not related to agriculture.

What is No?

Answers have been given to all the questions posted by you,  you may go through them properly. 

1. Allowable Constructions Without Changing Land Use

Certain constructions are typically allowed on agricultural land for horticultural or agricultural purposes without converting the land use, as per laws in most Indian states. These include:

• 
  Storage Structures: Construction of godowns, cold storage, or sheds for storing produce like fruits or vegetables.
• 
  Irrigation Structures: Wells, tube wells, water tanks, and pump houses.
• 
  Farmhouses: A small structure for residential use of farmers or workers directly engaged in farming. These are subject to specific size limits set by local laws.
• 
  Processing Units: Minimal processing units like grading, sorting, or packaging centers for horticultural produce.
• 
  Animal Shelters: Stables or sheds for animals used in farming activities.
• 
  Greenhouses and Polyhouses: Structures necessary for protected cultivation.

2. Area Coverage Limit

• The permissible area for construction on agricultural land is typically limited by state-specific laws. For instance:

  • In Uttarakhand, farmhouses or related constructions may be allowed but restricted to a maximum of 5% of the total land area.
  • Confirm exact limits by consulting local land use and revenue laws or authorities like the Tehsildar or Revenue Department.

3. Relevant Case Laws Allowing Construction

Here are some key judgments and legal principles:

• 
  S. Jagathiswari v. Revenue Divisional Officer (2021):

  • Allowed constructions related to agricultural activities (e.g., storage and sheds) without land-use conversion.

• 
  Ishwar Singh v. State of Haryana (1996):

  • Highlighted that activities directly linked to agricultural processes (e.g., cold storage) are permissible as ancillary uses.

• 
  Smt. Kausalya Devi Bogra & Ors. v. Land Acquisition Officer (1984):

  • Emphasized the broad scope of agricultural activity, including horticulture and related constructions.

4. Legal Definition of Agriculture and Agricultural Activity

• 
  Agriculture: Includes activities related to the cultivation of crops, horticulture, forestry, and allied activities like animal husbandry and poultry.
• 
  Agricultural Activity: Defined under Section 2(1)(A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, includes horticulture, cultivation, sowing, harvesting, and maintenance of crops and orchards.

5. Recommendations

• 
  Check Local Laws: Confirm specific provisions under the Uttarakhand Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act or contact the local Revenue Department for detailed guidelines.
• 
  Obtain Approvals: If required, apply for necessary permissions from local authorities before undertaking construction.
• 
  Consult Legal Experts: Engage with a lawyer or land consultant specializing in agricultural laws for tailored advice.

For detailed, personalized advice, consider a phone consultancy. Hope you find the information helpful. You are free to contact me for further discussion. If you could spare two minutes to write a review, it would be greatly appreciated and bring immense happiness to read it. Thank you.
Shubham Goyal

Dear,

Based on your query, here is a detailed response to address your concerns regarding permissible constructions on horticultural/agricultural land without changing its land use:

1. Specific Constructions Allowed on Horticultural Land

You can construct certain structures directly related to agricultural or horticultural activities without requiring a change in land use, such as:

• 
  Farmhouses: Used for the dwelling of individuals engaged in agricultural activities (subject to local laws).
• 
  Storage Structures: For storing crops, seeds, fertilizers, or farm produce.
• 
  Water Tanks or Irrigation Systems: Essential for maintaining the cultivation of horticultural crops.
• 
  Greenhouses/Polyhouses: For controlled farming or horticultural activities.
• 
  Pump Houses: To operate irrigation systems.
• 
  Packing and Grading Units: For post-harvest management of fruits and vegetables.
• 
  Compost or Manure Pits: Used for sustainable farming practices.

2. Area That Can Be Covered

The percentage of land that can be utilized for such constructions varies by state and is governed by local agricultural or revenue laws. Generally:

• 
  Farmhouses: Limited to 5%-10% of the total land area in most states.
• 
  Other Structures: Must be minimal and strictly for agricultural purposes.

Actionable Step: Verify the land utilization norms under the Uttarakhand Revenue Code or consult the local Tehsildar/Patwari for specific restrictions applicable to your area.

3. Relevant Case Law and Precedents

Several judgments from Indian courts have defined allowable constructions on agricultural land. Key examples include:

• 
  Ashok Kumar v. State of Rajasthan (2008): Clarified that constructions ancillary to agricultural activities do not amount to "land-use change."
• 
  T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad v. Union of India (1997): Highlighted the importance of restricting non-agricultural activities on such land while allowing agriculture-supportive infrastructure.
• 
  K.K. Roy v. Sub-Divisional Officer (2007): Permitted ancillary structures like pump houses and storage units on agricultural land.

These judgments emphasize that structures must primarily support agricultural or horticultural activities without altering the character of the land.

4. Legal Definition of Agriculture and Agricultural Activity

As per Indian law, including Section 2(1)(a) of the Agricultural Land Ceiling Act, agriculture is defined as:

• The cultivation of land for producing crops, fruits, and vegetables.
• Ancillary activities directly associated with such cultivation, include irrigation, storage, and processing of farm produce.

Horticulture is considered a subset of agriculture focusing on the cultivation of fruits, vegetables, flowers, and other plants.

5. Next Steps and Recommendations

1. 
   Consult Local Authorities: Approach the local Revenue Department to clarify permissible constructions without land-use conversion.
2. 
   Obtain Approvals if Required: Some constructions may require prior permissions, especially for farmhouses or large storage units.
3. 
   Follow Legal Norms: Ensure that any construction adheres to the guidelines set by the Uttarakhand government to avoid penalties.
4. 
   Retain Evidence of Use: Keep documentation proving that the structures serve horticultural purposes to avoid disputes.

If you require assistance in drafting applications for permissions or defending your rights in case of disputes, feel free to contact me.

Warm regards,
Adv. Aman Verma
Legal Corridor
www.legalcorridors.com

1. ‘agriculture’ includes horticulture, animal husbandry, pisciculture, flower farming, bee keeping and poultry farming;
2. You can construct any structure by way of improvement. Under Section 4 (13) (iv) of u.p. Land Revenue Code, construction includes, the erection of buildings on, or in the vicinity of the holding elsewhere than in an abadi or urban area, required for the convenient or profitable use or occupation of the holding; and (the renewal or reconstruction of any of the foregoing works, or alteration therein or additions thereto.
3. When the provision of law is clear, no judgment is required.

You can do any crops which don’t violate the land rules 

- As per law, an agricultural land cannot be used for residential purposes, and you cannot construct a house on agricultural land for residing.

- However you can construct farm house or temporary structure on agriculture land with the permission of the local authority/panchayat

- Generally to build farm house 4 % of total area allowed, and showing that you will keep your farm equipment, livestock, and needful things.