BHANWAR LAL Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an appeal u/s 39 of the Rajasthan Land Reforms & Resumption of Jagirs Act, 1952 (hereinafter referred as Act) which has been preferred by the Jagirdar against the judgment of the Dy. Collector, Jagir, Bharatpur dated 30. 6. 61.

(2.) THE items assailed relate to the income from forests, to the deduction on account of tribute to the summary deduction of Rs. 2250/- from the amount payable, and to a mistake in calculation in the amount of additional rehabilitation payable u/s 38e of the Act, So far as the income form forest is concerned it has been contended that the learned Dy. Collector, had no authority to interfere with the verification made by the Divisional Forest Officer under the provisions of Rule 37a of the Rules made under the Act. This Rule provides that when a claim for compensation is based on income from Jagir forest, the Jagir Commissioner, may call upon any officer of the Forest Department of the Govt. not below the rank of Divisional Forest Officer to inspect the forests and to submit his report about the estimate of income therefrom. Such an officer is required for the purpose of determining the income, to call upon the Jagirdar to furnish information in Form No. 8 within a period of one month and if such statement is not filed within the said period to make a summary enquiry and to make his recommendations to the Jagir Commissioner. THE Jagirdar has to be given an opportunity of hearing in participation of such an enquiry. THE Jagir Commissioner shall, on receipt of the recommendation of the Forest Officer, after giving the Jagirdar an opportunity of being heard and after hearing such other persons as he may like to be heard, make an order determining the period and the average annual income from the Jagir recording the reasons therefor. THE contention on behalf of the appellant is that the authority vested in the Jagir Commissioner and such other person as he may deem think fit by this Rule goes no farther than "hearing" alone. THE argument is that this "hearing" does not entitle the Jagir Commissioner to make any independent enquiry by himself, but that he is only to hear the parties against the report of the Forest Officer and decide only such objections as may be raised by them with respect to the same report. Now this is an interpretation attempted to be put by the learned counsel for the appellant which does not seem to be tenable. It is not laid down by this Rule that the Jagir Commissioner shall hear and decide only the objections, if any, raised against the recommendation of the Forest Officer. If it had been the case the language employed will have been like the one employed in Rule 20 (2) of these very Rules. THErein the Jagir Commissioner is to afford, upon the receipt of the report from the Enquiry Officer, all concerned parties an opportunity " to lodge objections against" such a report and to hear them if they appear with respect to the objections, and also to hear the parties with respect to the report itself. By not prescribing in Rule 37a that the Jagir Commissioner shall hear the parties with respect to objections against the recommendation of the Forest Officer and on the other hand prescribing that he shall hear all persons as he may like to be heard and determine the period and the income from the Jagir forest along with reasons, the legislature has in its wisdom authorised the Jagir Commissioner to make any enquiry he likes even when he has demanded a report from the Divisional Forest Officer and has received that recommendation from him. THEre is nothing in this Rule which may be taken to bind the Jagir Commissioner to accept the recommendation of the Forest Officer unless objected to by any party and specially, the Jagirdar. A mere "hearing" does not mean anything if it is not followed by power of giving any decision thereon. Besides, the Rule authorises the Jagir Commissioner not only to hear the Jagirdar and such other persons as he may like to be heard but also to determine the income and the period along with his reasons for the same. When an Officer is required to give reasons for determination he is required to make, it cannot but be held as implied that he is to make his own enquiry and come to his own conclusions for the reasons to be recorded. THE Jagir Commissioner here includes all the Officers empowered under the Act and the Rules made thereunder.