RAWAT JAGANNATH SINGH Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a writ application by Rawat Jagan-nathsingh who has described himself as the rightful owner to the jagir held by his father Rawat Lalsingh, and arises in connection with the recovery from him of a due called "talwarbandi". The petitioner's prayer is that the respondent State be prohibited from realising the sum of Rs. 9901/- from him by way of Talwarbandi. He has also prayed for an. order that the State be directed to release his estate from the management of the court of wards.

(2.) THE material facts are these. It is common ground between the parties that Rawat Lal-singh was the jagirdar of thikana Parsoli, and that he died on the 16th December, 1949. It is also not in dispute that this jagir happened to be placed under the management of the Courts of Wards during the regime of the former State of Mewar in Rawat Lalsingh's life-time. THE Jagir has since continued to remain' under the management of the State for one reason or another, and then the Rajasthan Land Reforms and Resumption of Jagirs Act, 1952 (No. VI of 1952) came into force, and there is no question of the petitioner's getting possession of the Jagir back, as all Jagirs of the class held by the petitioner's family have been resumed at this date. It appears that under a letter from the Revenue Secretary to the Additional Jagir Commissioner, Udaipur dated the 30th January 1953, it was stated that His Highness the Rajpramukh had anctioned the succession of the petitioner to the jagir of Parsoli which was held by his deceased father, on payment of a sum of Rs. 9900/-, inter alia, as "ked Nazarana". We are told that this Ked Nazarana is the same thing as the petitioner calls Talwarbandi. Consequently, the petitioner has been asked more than once to pay this amount or have it adiusted against the amount of compensation payable to him, but the petitioner has been resisting this payment so far, and he has eventually come forward with the present writ application. This is opposed by the State on the grounds that the Jagir of Parsoli had reverted to the State of Mewar on the death of the petitioner's father and that the petitioners could not succeed to it till his succession was recognized in accordance with law and custom governing jagirs in Mewar, and that Talwarbandi was a customary due which the petitioner is bound to pay in order to get his succession recognized in accordance with such law and custom.