AWAMI KUMAR Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition filed by Awami Kumar Mukherjee, Ex-Jagirdar of Thikana bagri, is directed against the order of the Board of Revenue, Rajas-than, dated 4th January, 1967 affirming that of the Jagir Commissioner dated 7th december. 1964 insofar as his claim for inclusion of Rs. 97,828. 50 P. being the amount of compensation paid to him for compulsory acquisition of land belonging to him as income accrued from sale of such land, in computation of the gross income under Schedule II Clause (f) of the Rajasthan Land Reforms and Resumption of Jagirs Act, 1952, was rejected.

(2.) THE facts of the case, in brief, are that the erstwhile Jaipur State by Council resolution No. J dated 2-10-1941 acquired 19 bighas and 12 biswas of land admeasuring 59,343 sq. yds. belonging to the petitioner under the Jaipur Land acquisition Act for Bani Park Extension Scheme of Jaipur City. Though under the revenue Standing Order No. 12 the petitioner was not entitled to any compensation upon such acquisition, the Jaipur Durbar made an ex gratia payment of Rs. 97,820. 50 p. The Thikana Bagri Jagir was resumed with effect from 1-10-1958 under Section 21 of the Rajasthan Land Reforms and resumption of Jagir Act, 1952 (which will hereinafter be called as 'the Act' ). Under Section 26 of the Act, the State Government was liable to pay compensation to the petitioner as the Ex-Jagirdar for the resumption of the jagir and the lands appurtenant thereto in accordance with the principles laid down in the Second Schedule, i. e. , at 10 times the net income Section 2 provides for determination of the gross income of the Jagirdar being the total income from his Jagir land derived from different sources in the basic year which in this case was the period from 1-7-1958 to 30-6-1959. Clause (f)thereof provides for taking into account the income from sale of culturable or abadi land calculated on the basis of average income therefrom during 20 yrs. immediately preceding the basic year. The petitioner made a claim for inclusion of the amount of Rs. 97,828. 50p. paid to him by way of compensation for compulsory acquisition of his 19 bighas and 12 biswas of Jagir lands on 2-101941. His contention before the Jagir Commissioner was that the compensation amount should be treated as income accrued from sale, as it undoubtedly was an item of income derived by him within 20 years immediately preceding the basic year. The Jagir Commissioner rejected the claim on the ground that on acquisition of the Jagir lands, the lands ceased to form part of the Jagir and, therefore, no compensation was payable for their resumption under Section 26 of the Act, as they could not be regarded as having been resumed under section 21 of the Act. On appeal, the Board of Revenue held that the petitioner had received compensation for the acquisition of the lands and he was not entitled to receive compensation for the same land twice. In its view, the lands in question having been acquired in the year 1941, they no longer remained as jagir lands and, therefore, no compensation was payable for the same under section 26 of the Act.

(3.) THE decision of the petition turns on the right construction of Schedule II clause (f), particularly of the word "sale" appearing in the expression "income from sale". Clause (f) of the Second Schedule reads as under: