KANWARLAL Vs. GANGALYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a revision against the order of the learned Collector, dated 19. 7. 62. The facts giving rise to this revision are as follows. On 4. 1. 59 the Patwari of the circle reported that the khatedars Bhura, Mangla, Mali had abandoned their land and the patels have unauthorisedly let out lands to several cultivators and are realising the rent in a very arbitrary manner. The Tehsildar started the proceedings under sec. 61 of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act and the proclamation was issued. The petitioners objected to this proclamation on the ground that since the khatedars had absconded they are in cultivatory possession of the said land and also alleged that khatedari rights have accrued to them, and they be declared khatedars under sec. 15 read with sec. 19 of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act. When these proceedings were in progress the said absconders presented themselves before the Tehsildar and the Patels Sarva Shri Ram Pratap, Narain Brahmins and Shri Har Sahai Gujar put in an application before the Tehsildar on 25. 7. 61 that they have given back the said land to the said absconders. The Tehsildar ultimately dropped the proceedings. The petitioners aggrieved by this order of the Tehsildar went in appeal before the Collector who rejected the appeal on 19. 7. 62. Aggrieved by the order of the Collector they have come up in revision before us. We have heard the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and have also gone through the record. The learned counsel for the petitioner argued that as they have been in cultivatory possession of the said land measuring 143 bighas, 15 biswas for a long period which is established from the report of the patwari itself the khatedari rights should accrue to them. The learned counsel further argued that they have been paying rent regularly to the Govt. As such a relationship of landlord and tenant has been established. The counsel for the non-petitioners argued that no land revenue has been paid by the petitioners to the Government as no rent receipts have been produced by them. He further argued that the patel had no legal right to let out this land to cultivators. The patels have also admitted in their application before the Tehsildar dated 25. 7. 61 that they have returned the land which was in their unauthorised possession.

(2.) IT is an admitted fact that the proceedings are under the provisions of sec. 61 of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act. Hence the petitioners who claim any rights over the disputed land should establish that they can get any relief under sec. 61 of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act. The plea of abandonment which has been advanced by the petitioners has not at all been established. Since there is a remedy open to the petitioners to file a regular suit for declaration of rights and since such rights cannot be adjudicated upon in such proceedings under sec. 61 of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act, we see no reason to interfere into the orders passed by both the lower courts. The revision is therefore rejected. .