MADUDI Vs. SAMELA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SHRI H. D. Ujjwal Mst. Madudi applied to the Assistant Collector Merta for reinstatement under sec. 7 of the Rajasthan (Protection of Tenants) Ordinance, No. IX of 1949. The Assistant Collector rejected the application on the ground that the opposite party were also tenants and where a tenant ejects or dispossess another tenant the Ordinance does not apply. He held that the preamble of the Ordinance clearly showed that this Ordinance was enacted to check the growing tendency of the land holders to eject their cultivators and further it was laid down in sec. 7 (2) of the Ordinance that notice of such application shall be given to the land holder. He, therefore, held that the ordinance was applicable only in cases where ejectment or dispossession has been caused by land holders.

(2.) AGAINST the above order this application has been filed by Mst. Madudi under sec. 10 (2) of the Ordinance. It is urged that the view -taken by the Assistant Collector of the scope of the Ordinance was wrong. This Ordinance was meant to give protection to tenants not only against land holders but also against trespassers.