NEBHAN DAS Vs. BANSHI LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India is directed against two orders of the Board of Revenue for Rajasthan; one by the Single Member of the Board (Ex. 5) dated January 21, 1969 and the other by the Division Bench of the Board (Ex. 6) dated January 28, 1977, whereby the Board held that the petitioners are not entitled to get their names recorded in record of rights in respect of land measuring 319 Bighas and 2 Biswas, in Khasra No. 609, situated in Mouza Gangrar.

(2.) IT is the admitted case of the parties that Mouza Gangrar was a Jagir village of Rao Manohar Singhji of Bedla, who, by a registered sale-deed dated May 24, 1958 sold the land in question to the petitioners. The petitioners' case is that on resumption of the Jagir of Rao Manohar Singhji with effect from August 21, 1954, the land in question became his "khatedari" land under section 10 of the Rajasthan Land Reforms and Resumption of Jagirs Act, 1952. IT appears that after purchasing the land in question, the petitioners made an application to the Gram Panchayat, for mutating their names as "khatedars" in place of Rao Manohar Singhji, but, under the instructions of the Collector of the District, the Gram Panchayat, ultimately, disallowed the petitioners' request, by its order dated February 3, 1963. Thereupon, the petitioners filed an appeal before the Collector, who dismissed the same by his order dated March 3, 1963 (Ex. 3 ). Aggrieved by the decision of the Collector, the petitioners filed appeal before the Revenue Appellate Authority, which allowed the petitioners' appeal by its order dated March 5, 1964 (Ex. 4) and directed that the petitioners' names may be mutated and entries may be made in the revenue records in their favour. Dissatisfied with the decision of the Revenue Authority, respondents Nos. 1 to 4, who are villagers of Mouza Gangrar, filed a revision application before the Board of Revenue for Rajasthan, which was laid before a Single Member of the Board, who, by his order dated January 21, 1969 (Ex. 5), held that in view of the provisions contained in sec. 16 of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act, "khatedari" rights could not accrue in respect of the land in question, which was covered by clauses (2) and (3) of section 16 of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act. IT was observed that the land in question was used for casual or occasional cultivation in the bed of the tank and that it was covered by water and used for the purposes of growing "singhara" or the like produce. In this view of the matter, he allowed the revision application and set aside the order of the Revenue Appellate Autho-rity and restored that of the Collector. The petitioners then filed special appeal which too was dismissed by a Division Bench of the Board by its order dated January 28, 1977 (Ex. 6 ).