AZIZUDDIN Vs. BOARD OF REVENUE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The first question raised for our consideration is, whether erstwhile land holders holding the land in joint Khata under the then Ruler of Bhopal would be entitled to the benefit of the Notification No. 71, dated 25th February, 1941 under which the land owners who were dispossessed from their land could claim preferential right of reallotment of their land, and whether the said Notification is only an executive order issued by the Government of Bhopal, as it is signed by the Assistant Revenue Secretary, Government of Bhopal, having no force of law or was it issued by the Ruler himself which would undisputedly have the force of law and in that case, whether the appellant is entitled to be conferred the benefit under it

(2.) The second question raised is, if the appellant lost right in his holding on account of non-payment of the tractorization charges which was due under the Bhopal State Reclamation and Development of Lands (Eradication of Kans) Ordinance, 1949 (No. XXXVIII of 1949) and the Bhopal Reclamation and Development of Lands (Eradication of Kans) Act, 1954 (Act No. XIII of 1954) (hereinafter referred to as "the Ordinance' and 'the 1954 Act' respectively), and since the provisions for charging the tractorization charges both under the Ordinance and the 1954 Act having been held to be ultra vires, consequently, notices under it also declared illegal in the case of State of Madhya Pradesh v. Champalal, (1964) 6 SCR 35 , then, whether the appellant would not be entitled to get back his lost disputed land

(3.) In order to appreciate the controversy and to adjudicate the point in issue, it is necessary to give some of the essential facts of this case.