HEMA Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an appeal under sec. 39 of the Rajasthan Land Reforms and Jagir Resumption Act against the order of the Deputy Collector, Jagir Pali dated the 18th of November, 1964. The facts of the case in brief are that the learned Deputy Collector Jagir on the 25. th of March, 1964 rejected an objection raised against the title of Hema appellant for being considered as the adopted son of Shatidan and ordered the issue of provisional award in favour of the appellant. On 29th of May, 1964 the legal adviser urged that the question involved in this case related to right, title and interest but this was over ruled on the 8th of June, 1964 on the ground that this has already been decided on the 25th of March, 1964. On the 16th of July, 1964 the learned Deputy Collector ordered the issue of the final award. In this case Form No. 10 had not been received but it was ordered that the Tehsildar should deduct the dues of the Government independently of the claim. On the 28th July, 1964 the counsel for the jagirdar requested for a review of the order dated the 16th July, 1964 on the ground that the date determined as the date of resumption was not correct. The learned Deputy Collector also found that the verification had not been properly made. He entrusted the file for re-verification to the audit staff. On the 13th of August, 1964 the re-verification report was received from the audit section and an order was issued for issue of notice to the jagirdar. On the 17th of November, 1964 the learned Deputy Collector without deciding the question raised in review sought to review his order on a different ground. He held that though the name of the appellant was entered as the jagirdar in the settlement record over the whole of the land yet in accordance with the order of the Collector dated the 8th of July, 1959 the share of one of the co-sharers Mst. Tulsi had been escheated to the Government. The final award issued on the basis of Rs. 521. 39 was ordered to be reduced by Rs. 276. 03. With regard to the balance, he held that since Hema was not the natural son of Shatidan the Collector could not decide as per provisions contained in the Jagir Validation Act that he was the successor of Shatidan. The matter had to be decided by the Board of Revenue, and till it was decided the appellant was not entitled to any compensation. Aggrieved by this order an appeal has been preferred before us.

(2.) WE have heard the counsel for the parties and have also gone through the record. The impugned order was attacked on two grounds. First, the Deputy Collector Jagir could not review the order dated 16. 7. 64 on the basis given in the reviewing order of the 18th November, 1964 without setting aside the order of the 29th of May, 1964. Secondly, provisions of O. 47, r. 4 (2) and of R. 8 have not been followed in this case and the learned Deputy Collector Jagir has therefore committed a material irregularity in the exercise of his jurisdiction.