REWAD Vs. BAKHTAWAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The following point has been referred to the Full Bench by a Division Bench of the Board : - -

(2.) Shri C.B. Sharma appearing for Shri Rewad has argued that the term judicial matter as defined in sec. 23 (2) of the Rajasthan Land Revenue Act, 1956 means a proceeding in which a revenue court or officer has to determine the rights and liabilities of the parties thereto. He has further argued that as laid down in sec. 38 of the said Act in making appointments of Lumberdars due regard shall be had to local customs, hereditary claims, entry is village records, residence in toe village and such others matters as may be prescribed. The contention is that as the appointment of Lumberdars involves a decision of here litary claims it would tenant amount to a determination of the rights an 1 liabilities of the parties, and hence the matter should be deemed to be a judicial one As against this Shri Kailashnarain appearing fur Sari Bakhtawar has argued that the first schedule of the Rajasthan Land Revenue Act gives the list of judicial matters. As many as 15 items are included in it but the appointment of Lumberdars or patels is not to be found in it.

(3.) We have given due consideration to the argument addressed to us by the learned counsel for the parties. Sec. 3 of the Rajasthan Land Revenue Act vests the control of all non -judicial matters connected with revenue in the State other than matters connected with settlement in the State Government and the control of all judicial matters and of alt matters connected with settlement is vested in the Board. This section is based on the pattern of sec. 3 of the United Provinces Land Revenue Act. It runs as below : - - "The control of all non -judicial matters connected with the Land Revenue in the U. P. other than matters connected with settlement is vested in the Local Government and the control of all judicial matters and of all matters connected with settlement under this Act is vested in the Board." The Rajasthan Land Revenue Act defines the term "judicial matter" but the U. P. Land Revenue Act contains no such definition. However Chapter XXXV of the U.P. Revenue Manual lays down judicial and non -judicial matters under the U. P. Land Revenue Act This is in pursuance of Government notification No 811 A. 418 dated the 21st June, 1923. About 15 items are to be found in para 911 of this chapter and most of them are to be found in the First Schedule of the Rajasthan Land Revenue Act as well In Chapter XXX of the U. P. Manual appointment and removal of Lumberdars is a specific it m appearing at the end of the list and the same is conspicuous by its absence from the First Shedule of the Rajasthan Land Revenue Act It is evident that the first schedule has been moulded upon the pattern of Chapt. XXXV of the U. P. Land Revenue Manual and the fact that the appointment and removal of Lumberdars which has been declared to a judicial matter in U.P. has been significantly omitted from the First Schedule. In the present case, we are concerned only with the appointment of a Lumberdar and not with the removal. The argument relating to appointment of a Lumberdar on hereditary claims is one of the numerous factors to be taken into consideration while appointing a Lumberdar and as such it cannot be said that the appointment of a Lumberdar is nothing but an exclusive recognition of a hereditary claim. In fact it is easy a conceive cases where hereditary claims may be ignored as other factors may have greater impelling force than this factor. The inclusion of hereditary claim in sec. 38 is merely a directive to the Appointing authority to consider it as well and give such consideration to it as the circumstances of the case demand, in juxtaposition with other factors. Thus it cannot be said that an appointment of a Lumberdar is a pure and simple adjudication upon the rights of the parties. The appointment of a Lumberdar as envisaged in the Act is a non -judicial matter. The reference be answered accordingly.