CHIMARAM Vs. MAHARAO KHUMAN SINGHJI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a reference made by the Division Bench on 7. 11. 51. The point of reference, is that on 21. 10. 44 vide No. 4524 the Revenue Minister of the covenanting Bikaner State ordered that if during the settlement operations of a jagir village a muafidar was found to hold a muafi covered by a patta no rent may be assessed on his muafi land but if it was not covered by a patta or any other document it shall be assessed at half the rent assessable thereon, notwithstanding the fact that they did not pay any rent in the past. Decisions were taken in compliance of this law in the aforesaid State as also by this Board. An objection has now been raised by the applicant that the notification referred to above has not been published in the State Gazette of the above named State and that it has been held by the Supreme Court in Harla vs. The State of Rajasthan that mere resolution of a Council of Ministers in the Jaipur State without further publication or promulgation would not be sufficient to make a law operative. Therefore the same principle applies in this case.

(2.) COUNSELS for the parties were heard.