MUTHU VELU Vs. STATE OF MADRAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution relate to the levy of assessment on private lands in inam villages which were taken over under the provisions of Madras Act 26 of 1948. Under Section 13 of that Act, in the case of an inam estate the land-holder is entitled to ryotwari patta in respect of lands which immediately before the notified date belonged to him as private lands within the meaning of Section 3 (10) (b) of the Estates Land Act or stood recorded as private land. Under Section 16 (1), every person, whether a landholder or a ryot, who becomes entitled to a ryotwari patta under the Act in respect of any land shall with effect on and from the notified date be liable to pay to the Government such assessment as may be lawfully imposed on the land. Under Section 22 of the Act, a ryotwari settlement of all the estates including inam estates taken over under the Act is contemplated. Until sucn ryotwari settlement effected in pursuance of Section 22 has been brought into force, the method of determining the land revenue payable to Government with effect on and from the notified date is set out in Section 23, Clause (a) provides for any land held for purposes of agriculture, not being private land. Three alternative bases are mentioned viz, (I) where the rent payable to the landholder has been determined under the Madras Estates (Reduction of Bent) Act, 1947, the rent so determined, or (2) where the rent has not been so determined, the rent which, would, have been payable to the landholder in respect of the fasli year in which the estate is notified, or (3) where no rent was payable, the rent which would be payable to the landholder immediately before the notified date, by a ryot holding similar land with similar advantages in the neighbourhood. Clause (b) of Section 23 provides that in respect of other lands --and private lands wourd come within this category -- the land revenue shall be calculated at such rate or rates as the Government may, by general or special order, determine. In exercise of the powers conferred under Section 67 (1) and (2) of the Act, the Government, by means of a rule, delegated their powers under Section 23 (b), to the Board of Revenue, and in exercise of these powers so delegated, the Board issued: on 16-6-1950 certain instructions for the fixation of land revenue for the different classes of lands falling under Section 23 (b) including private lands of landholders. The material extract from these instructions relating to private lands is as follows:

(2.) The Collector of Tanjore proceeded to levy assessment on the private lands in the inam estates which are the subject matter of these writ applications in accordance with the above instructions. In so far as the principle of fixing the assessment is to adopt the assessment of a similar land in the vicinity in the same village and in so far as no distinction is made between private lands of a landholder and ryoti lands in fixing assessment by reason only of the fact that the one belongs to the landholder and the other to the ryot, the petitioners have no complaint. Indeed, there cannot be any room for complaint. In the counter affidavit filed by the Assistant Secretary, Board of Revenue (Settlement of Estates) on behalf of the State, it is said, explaining the policy of the Government, that it was considered that it was only proper that in the case of a landholder's private land, the land revenue should as far as possible be equivalent to the land revenue payable for a similar ryoti land with similar advantages in the neighbourhood. This is an extremely commendable attitude on behalf of the Government. The petitioners do not object to taking only the ryoti lands bearing cash rent for 'purposes of comparison when there are both grain rent and cash rent lands in the village, Nor to they object to the adoption of the highest rates for ryoti lands in the nearest village where conditions are similar in the case of private lands In villages where there are no ryoti lands for purposes of comparison. But the petitioners do object to the method of calculation adopted when the ryoti land to be compared with in the village is grain rent land. According to the instructions, in such a case, no comparison need be made, but the ryotwari rate in the district for the same class of land shall be adopted, garden land being treated as dry land. It is now common ground that "class" mentioned only refers to the division into wet and dry. By a subsequent order of Government (G. O. No. 1858 Revenue dated 1-7-1953), the highest rate in the taluk has been adopted instead of the highest rate in the district. But this alteration was to be given effect to only from fasli 1363.

(3.) The petitioners state that this method of assessment is opposed to Article 14 of the Constitution, because there has been an unjust discrimination between the owner of private lands and a ryot, both of whom are entitled to ryotwari pattas under the Estates Abolition Act. The point is thus developed in the affidavit filed in support of the application.