LAXMAN SINGH Vs. RAJ PRAMUKH OF MADHYA BHARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issue of writ in the nature of mandamus or any other direction or an order or a writ against the non -applicants declaring an order passed by the Jagir Commissioner on 12 -9 -50 and affirmed by the Madhya Bharat Government on 14 -5 -52 as illegal and ultra vires and for an order restraining the non -applicants No. 1 to 3 from taking any action against the applicant in the event of his failure, to comply with those orders.

(2.) THE Petitioner states that he is a Jagirdar of Harsi Jagir; that he was not required under any law to introduce within his jagir either Zamindari or Raiyatwari system of land administration and that, therefore, he had leased out in 1909 lands to, the non -applicant tenants No. 4 to 31 under separate contracts. The Petitioner further states that in 1938 these leases were revised and the rents enhanced and that since the revision of the leases the tenants paid enhanced rents until 1949. In this year on complaint by the tenants to the Madhya Bharat Government the Jagir Commissioner passed an order directing the applicant to realise the rents according to the pattas issued in 1908 and to refund the tenants the excess amount realised from them since the revision of the rent in 1938. The Petitioner then appealed to the Madhya Bharat Government against the said order of the Jagir Commissioner and the order was upheld in appeal.

(3.) A writ or an order prayed for cannot also be issued against the Raj Pramukh or the Madhya Bharat Government or the Jagir Commissioner. It is not the case of the applicant that the Madhya Bharat Government is empowered under any law to make an order under certain circumstances directing a Jagirdar to realise rents from his tenants at a particular rate and that such an order when passed is a quasi judicial order. The Petitioner also does not allege that the Madhya Bharat Government is bound under some law to see that the tenants of a Jagirdar pay rent to him at the rate agreed to by them, that is, by the tenants. In fact the Petitioner says that the non -applicants No. 1 to 3 cannot under any law intervene in any dispute between a Jagirdar and his tenants as regards the rent. The orders complained of are in my opinion, purely executive orders. In the order dated 14 -5 -52 of the Government by which the Jagir Commissioner's order was maintained it has been distinctly stated that the order passed by the Jagir Commissioner was an administrative order passed by him in exercise of his powers of supervision and control over the Jagirdars. No doubt, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India this Court has jurisdiction to issue an order against even an executive officer who has issued an administrative order in order to safeguard the fundamental rights of a citizen and to prevent injuries being caused to the rights of a citizen by the order. But then the Petitioner has not been able to show that any real injury has already been caused to him or about to be caused by the order of the Government. The orders of the Government and the Jagir Commissioner challenged by the Petitioner do not oust the jurisdiction of the subordinate Courts to determine the rent cases already instituted by the applicant against his tenants. Again, the orders have not the effect of a juridical determination of the question of the rent payable by the tenants to the Petitioner. If in the rent -suits filed by the applicant, the tenants plead in defence, the orders of the Jagir Commissioner and the Madhya Bharat Government, it is open to the applicant to say in those suits that the said orders are of no validity and are not binding on the Court. Learned Counsel for the applicant urged that if he does not comply with the orders of the Government his Jagir might be placed under a Court of Wards by the Government. The apprehension that Government might assume the superintendence of the Jagir of the applicant in the event of his failure to obey the orders of the Government, cannot in my opinion, be a good ground for the issue of a writ in favour of the applicant. If and when the Government passes an order placing the management of the Jagir of the applicant under Court of Wards, the Petitioner can come up to this Court challenging the validity of that order. At present, no right of the Petitioner has been infringed or about to be infringed by the orders of the Government.