SADASHIV RANGNATH Vs. SHAIKH BIBAN SHAIKH BALAMBHAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is directed against the order passed by the Minister of State for Revenue (Appellate Authority) on January, 25, 1977 allowing the appeal partly and setting aside the order passed by the Tahsildar, Gangapur and remitting the matter back to the Tahsildar, Gangapur, for disposal according to law.

(2.) Few admitted facts which gave rise to this petition may be narrated as under: The land in dispute bears survey No. 33 situate at village Godhegaon, Taluka Gangapur, District Aurangabad. The petitioner was the original Inamdar in respect of this land. The nature of the inam was Madad Mash. This provisions of the Hyderabad Abolition of Inams and Cash Grants Act, 1954 (hereinafter referred to as "the said Act") were brought into force in the erstwhile State of Hyderabad on July 20, 1955. The land in dispute is situated in the erstwhile State of Hyderabad and, therefore, the provisions of the said act are applicable to the said land. According to the provisions of section 3 of the said Act, all such inams would vest in the Government on July 20, 1955 and, thereafter the provisions of the said Act would be made applicable to all such inam lands.

(3.) The respondent No. 1 claims to be the tenant of the disputed land. The Deputy Collector by his order dated September 7, 1961 granted the occupancy rights under section 6 of the said Act in favour of the petitioner. It appears that this order was passed ex parte and the respondent No. 1 was not party to the said proceedings. On June, 30, 1962, the respondent No. 1 made an application to the Deputy Collector contending inter alia, that he therefore, he is entitled for occupancy rights. On September 24, 1962, the application filed by the respondent No. 1 was dismissed for default. We are told that no proceedings were taken out by the respondent No. 1 against the order dated September 24, 1962 and thus the same became final. On October 2, 1966, the respondent No. 1 filed second application to the Tahsildar contending, inter alia, that he has been in possession of the disputed land as a tenant of the petitioner for 1957 and he continued to be in possession on July 1, 1960. The respondent No. 1 further stated that by reason of his possession over the disputed land on July 1, 1960 he is entitled to become occupant under the provisions of the said Act and occupancy rights be conferred on him. This application was opposed by the petitioner on several grounds and it is not necessary to state in details the challenges given by the petitioner to the said petition. Upon hearing both the parties, the Tahsildar, by his order dated January, 4, 1967, rejected the second application filed by the respondent No. 1 on merits. The Tahsildar in his judgment observed that since the occupancy rights were already conferred on the petitioner, he has no jurisdiction to entertain this second application. The Tahsildar accordingly dismissed the application. It is also admitted position that no appeal was carried by the respondent No. 1, the aggrieved party, to the Appellate Authority and, therefore, the order passed by the Tahsildar on January, 4, 1967 on merits became final.