BABU RAM Vs. THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BABU Ram, Petitioner, has prayed for the issue of a writ of mandamus calling upon the State of Uttar Pradesh, opposite party, to make payment to the Petitioner of a sum of Rs. 1,065/12/ - . The Petitioner's case is that he was the zamindar and Jambardar of the properties specified in the annexure to the affidavit and the persons named in another annexure were the hereditary tenants of that land. The Petitioner was entitled to realise rent from them at agreed rates which were entered in the record of rights of 1356F. On the enforcement of the U.P. Agricultural Tenants (Acquisition of Privileges) Act, 1949, the tenants deposited a certain sum purporting to be ten times of the annual rent paid by them, in the State treasury, and sought a declaration under Section 6 of that Act entitling them to privileges mentioned in Section 7. The Petitioner alleges that instead of depositing ten times the agreed rent, the tenants deposited ten times of the amount which was determined as reduced rent by the Assistant Collector under Section 4(2) of the said Act. The Petitioner's case is that, irrespective of whatever may have been deposited by the tenants, the Petitioner under Sections 7(b) and 8 of the Act is entitled to the amount deemed to have been deposited with the State Government calculated on the basis of the rent which was agreed upon between the parties and which was payable under the U.P. Tenancy Act. On the other hand, the State Government is offering to him the amount deemed to have been deposited under Section 7(b) calculated at the rate of reduced rent fixed by the Assistant Collector under Section 4(2). It is under these circumstances that the writ of mandamus mentioned above has been sought by the Petitioner.

(2.) THE liability of the State Government to pay any amount to the Petitioner is laid down under Section 8 of the U.P. Agricultural Tenants (Acquisition of Privileges) Act, 1949 and that liability is limited to the amount deemed to have been deposited under Clause (b) of Section 7. This clause begins with the words, 'Notwithstanding anything contained in any law or contract'. Consequently, the provisions of this clause overrule the provisions of the U.P. Tenancy Act, as well as any contract which might have been entered into between the Petitioner and his tenants with regard to the rent to be paid. The amount deemed to have been deposited is to be calculated on the basis of rents falling due after the date on which deposit is made by the tenant under Section 3 of the Act. The words used are, 'in respect of every instalment of rent falling due after the date aforesaid'. The question arises as to what is the rent falling due for the purposes of this clause. The word 'rent' having been used, its meaning has to be found by applying the provisions of Section 4 of the Act which lays down as to what is the amount of annual rent payable for any land for the purposes of the Act. Consequently, the instalments of rent falling due have to be calculated on the basis of the rent as determined under Section 4. The method of determination of rent under Section 4 is laid down in ordinary cases under Sub -section (1) of that section, but in a few special cases there is an overriding provision in Sub -section (2), of that section. Under Sub -section (2), if the rent payable by a tenant is more than double the amount computed at hereditary rates applicable, the rent payable for the purposes of Sub -section (1) of Section 4 - -which also means rent payable for all the purposes of the Act - -has to be such amount not exceeding double the amount aforesaid as the Assistant Collector may determine to be just and proper. In other words, what has been called the reduced rate by the Petitioner is the rent determined by the Assistant Collector in accordance with this provision of law. That amount is the amount of rent payable for all the purposes of the Agricultural Tenants (Acquisition of Privileges) Act, 1949, including the purposes of Section 7(b). It is one -half of that amount which is deemed to have been deposited under this provision of law, and it is that very amount to which the Petitioner becomes entitled under Sections 8 and 9 of the Act. The payment offered by the State Government is, therefore, clearly in accordance with law.