JAGANNATH SINGH Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SHRI Jagannath Singh, the petitioner in this writ petition filed under Articles 226 and 226 of the Constitution, was the Jagirdar of Thikana Malas in the former State of Mewar. A tank known as 'Arjun Sagar' had been constructed by Shri Arjun Singh in village Malas, Tehsil Mandal, District Bhilwara. The petitioner's grand father, Shri Khunaan Singh reconstructed the said tank so as to enable it to meet the requirements of irrigation of jagirs land and for that purpose he was advanced a loan, on Rs. 13.000/ - by the former State of Mewar in 1936 under a written deed dated Vikram Samwat year 1992 Kati Bid 11. The said loan carried interest 6% per annum. Shri Khumansingh died in 1940 and shortly thereafter his son, Shri Ratansingh, the father of the petitioner, also died leaving behind the petitioner. As the petitioner was put under the Management of the Court of Wards and was released from the administration of the Court of Wards in the year 1954. During the period, the Makana was under the administration of the Court of Watds, a sum of Rs. 6,335/ - was paid towards the principal amount of the loan aforesaid. The Jagir of the petitioner was resumed under tine previsions of the Rajasthan Land Reforms and Resumption of Jagirs Act, 1952, with effect from 23rd August, 1954. As a result of the aforesaid resumption of the Jagir, the petitioner was also deprived of the possession of the Arjun Sagar tank referred to above.

(2.) BY order dated 31st August, 1959, the Finance department of the Government of Rajasthan determined that the total amount payable by the petitioner towards the loan and interest payable thereon was Rs. 26,000/ -fprincipal amount Rs. 13,000/ - and interest amount Rs. 13,000/ - and that after deducting the amount of Rs. 6,335/ - which had already been deposited, a sum of Rs. 19,265/ - was the balance and outstanding against the said loan. While determining the amount of compensation payable to the petitioner irrespective of his Jagir which was resumed under the provisions of the Rajasthan Land Reforms and Resumption of Jagirs Act, 1952, the total amount payable to the petitioner by way of compensation and rehabilitation in respect of the said Jagir was assessed at Rs. 15,184.34 P. and it Was further determined that a sum of Rs. 3,592.19/ - was deductible from the aforesaid amount of compensation towards dues recoverable from the petitioner under Section 22(1) of the said Act. No determination was, however, made with regard to the amount recoverable from the petitioner as against the loan of Rs. 13,000/ - advanced to him by the former State of Mewar. But in the said order of final determination of compensation a note was appended to the effect that the amount recoverable by the Finance Department was still due. The total amount payable to the petitioner by way of compensation of the Jagir was Rs. 10692 10/ -and after adjusting the said sum against the sum of Rs. 19665/ -payable by the petitioner toward the principal amount and interest on the loan advanced to the petitioner by the former of State of Mewar, the Government of Rajasthan directed that a sum of Rs. 8971 90/ -was recoverable from the petitioner. The Treasury Officer, Udaipur, thereafter, sent a requisition on 23rd May, 1960 to the Collector and District Magistrate, Bhilwara, for the recovery of Rs. 8971.90/'from the petitioner under the provisions the of Rajasthan Public Demands Recovery Act, 1952, (hereinafter referred to as the Act). After the receipt of the said requisition, the Sub Division Officer, Bhilwara, on 5th August, 1960 issued a certificate under Section 4 of the Act, certifying that a sum of Rs. 8,971 90 is due and justly recoverable and that its recovery was not barred by any law. On 5th August, 1960, the Sub -Divisional Officer, Bhilwara, issued a notice to the petitioner, under Section 6 of the Act, whereby the petitioner was informed that if he wanted to deny his liability to pay the sum of Rs. 8,971.90/ - mentioned in the certificate, he may, within 30 days from the service of said notice, file an objection denying liability in whole or in part and if the petitioner failed to file such an objection within 30 days or if he failed to show cause or did not show sufficient cause why the said certificate should not be executed, the certificate would be executed. On the receipt of the said notice, the petitioner, on 6th September, 196 0, filed an objection petition denying his liability to pay the sum of Rs. 8,371 90/ -and requested that the proceedings for the recovery of the aforesaid amount against him may be cropped. The S.D.O, Bhilwara, by his order dated 25th January, 196), rejecting the said objection petition filed by the petitioner and proceeded with the recovery of the amount of Rs. 8,971 90/. under the certificate dated 5th August, 1961, found by him. In the aforesaid recovery proceedings, the petitioner deposited the sum of Rs. 8,971.90/ - on various cases between 1969 and 1972 Thus the total amount of the loan of Rs. 13,000/ - determined as well as to interest payable on the said loan has been paid by the petitioner and the recovery proceedings are confined to the interest payable on the sum of Rs. 8,971 90/ - from 5th August, 1960 till the repayment of the said amount in 1972. Aggrieved by the aforesaid recovery proceedings, the petitioner filed this writ petition on 4th September, 1972.

(3.) IN reply to the first contention, the learned Deputy Government Advocate has submitted that by notification dated 20th Pebruary, 1957, issued in exercise of the powers conferred on it Under Section 26(1)(d) of the Rajasthan Land Revenue Act, 1956, the State Government has conferred on all the Sub -Divisional Officers, the powers of the Collector under the Rajasthan Public Demands and Recovery Act, 1952, and that in view of the aforesaid notification, the S.D.O., Bhilwara, was competent to issue the certificate dated 5th August, 1960 Under Section 4 of the Act and also to take all the steps under the Act for the recovery of the amount due as mentioned in the said certificate. The submission of the learned Deputy Government Advocate is that Section 26(1)(d) of the Rajasthan Land Revenue Act empowers the State Government to confer on the Sub -Divisional Officer all the powers conferred on the Collector, under Section 25 of the said Act, which includes the power conferred on the Collector under the Rajasthan Public Demands Recovery Act. The submission of the learned Counsel for the petitioner, on the other hand, is that Section 26(1)(d) of the Rajasthan Land Revenue Act, is confined in its operation to the powers conferred on Collector under the Land Revenue Act and does not empower the State Government to confer on the Sub -Divisional Officer, the powers conferred on the Collector under the Rajasthan Public Demands Recovery Act.