DEEPA Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant, who was once accepted by Respondent 5 Ram Chandra (hereinafter the respondent) as a tenant when proceeding under Rajasthan Tenancy Act, 1955 (Tenancy Act) was initiated against him, has lost that right when the respondent agitated the matter again under Section 82 of the Rajasthan Land Revenue Act, 1956. Shortly put, this is the grievance of the appellant, and the same is well founded as it would appear from what is being stated later.

(2.) In the first proceeding, the respondent had sought eviction of the appellant by invoking Section 177 of the Tenancy Act on the ground that the latter had become liable for ejectment because of using the land contrary to the purpose for which it was leased. The respondent lost that suit on the ground that the land being part of jagir, he had no locus standi to file the suit, as jagir stood abolished by the force of the Rajasthan Land Reforms and Resumption of Jagirs Act, 1952 (Jagir Act). That order was passed on 30/6/1963 and was confirmed even by the Board of Revenue on 19-1-1978.

(3.) In 1987 the respondent filed an application before the Collector under Section 82 of the Rajasthan Land Revenue Act for making a reference to the Board of Revenue to recommend making of entry in the record of rights relating to the self-same land in favour of Idol Shri Charbhujaji - the respondent being its Pujari. The appellant contended, inter alia, that the matter could not be reopened in view of the earlier proceeding and, in any case. he having become a khatedar tenant under provisions of the Tenancy Act, the record of rights could not be corrected to show the respondent as a khatedar tenant. The Board of Revenue did not accept the plea of res judicata and having taken a view that the appellant's right was not heritable and transferable, granted prayer of the respondent. On the High court being approached by the appellant, he did not get any relief, inter alia, because he had filed Khasra Girdawari relating to Samvat 2012 1957 A. D. ) by which year Tenancy Act had come into force. Hence this appeal under Article 136 of the Constitution.