SPECIAL DEPUTY COLLECTOR Vs. RAJAH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Certain land situated in two villages and belonging to the impartible estate of the Rajah of Ramnad was acquired under the Land Acquisition Act for the purpose of making a road. The acquiring Officer (the Special Deputy Collector, Ramnad) deposited the compensation money in Court under Section 31 of the Act. The District Judge, holding in effect that the money should not have been deposited, ordered it to be paid to the Rajah. These are revision petitions filed by the Government against his order.

(2.) A preliminary objection was raised on behalf of the Rajah that as the Land Acquisition Act provided in Section 54 for an appeal, no revision petition could be heard. Realising that this contention would involve a lengthy argument of only academical interest, and realising also the importance of the point raised in the petitions, we converted the petitions into appeals and proceeded to hear them on their merits.

(3.) The learned District Judge in a brief order has given two reasons for his decision: (i) that the very existence of acquisition proceedings which the Rajah could not resist is a necessity which would permit alienation under Section 4 of the Impartible Estates Act and (ii) that the Rajah is not a person who can come within the phrase incompetent to alienate in Section 31 or having no power to alienate under Section 32 of the Act.