BHANU PRATAP SINGH Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a writ application by Thakur Bhanu Pratap Singh under Arts. 226 and 227 of the Constitution praying for the issue of a writ of certiorari or any other writ or direction in the nature thereof to quash the judgment and order of the Revenue Board dated the 17th March, 1961.

(2.) THE material facts are these. THE petitioner is the ex-Jagirdar of Thikana Dudu which was part of the former State of Jaipur. This Jagir was resumed on the 4th of February, 1956, under the Rajasthan Land Reforms and Resumption of Jagirs Act, 1952 (Act No. IV of 1952, hereinafter referred to as the Act ). THE petitioner made an application for compensation in connection with the resumption of his Jagir to the Jagir Commissioner on the 17th April/1956. In the statement of claim then filed by him, he valued the gross income of Jagir at Rs. 68,447/0/6 as follows : - Income from Amount 1. Land Revenue 57,054/ 2/6 2. Forest 985/11/9

(3.) WHAT then is the kind of enquiry which the Jagir Commissioner has to make under the Act in order to determine the matter of compensation ? Sec. 32 provides the answer. It says that the Commissioner shall make "such enquiry as he deems necessary" before awarding compensation. The point which specially requires to be noted in this connection is that sec. 32 does not merely say "after enquiry" or "after making an enquiry" but it says "after making such enquiry as he deems necessary". The last-mentioned expression is by no means rigid and is quite flexible, and, therefore, the Jagir Commissioner has been given a discretion to embark upon an enquiry which may suit the requirements of a case before him and it would be going too far to hold that such an inquiry has to be made in accordance with the requirements of the Civil Procedure Code or the Evidence Act. We are quite alive to sub-sec. (3) of sec. 31 to which we have drawn attention above which provides that where a Jagirdar relies upon any documents whether in his possession or power or not as evidence in support of the statement of claim, he shall enter such documents in a list to be added or annexed to his statement of claim. There was no provision in the Act at the time with which we are concerned and when the present petitioner preferred his claim for compensation, which prescribes the time for the "production" of such documents or the stage at which they ought to be produced. Our attention has been drawn in this connection to sec. 22-A of the Act which among other things lays down that - "every jagirdar whose jagir lands have been or are resumed under this Act shall, within two months of the date of the commencement of the Rajasthan Land Reforms and Resumption of Jagirs (11th Amendment) Act, 1959, or of the date of resumption of his jagir lands, whichever may be latter, deliver to the Collector, or to any officer authorised in this behalf by the Collector, after obtaining a duly signed receipt from him for the same, all records relating to the administration and management of his jagir lands so resumed or pertaining to the various items of receipts and disbursements mentioned in cls. 2 and 4 respectively of the Second Schedule to this Act, which, in respect of such jagir lands, such jagirdar may have maintained or caused to be maintained or which may then be in his possession or power. " But it is enough to point out that this provision did not exist in 1956, and, therefore, can have no bearing on the decision of the question before us. We have, therefore, no hesitation in coming to the conclusion that sec. 31 (3) is a directory provision and no more.