ISHAR Vs. NAIB TAHSILDAR OF GOVINDGARH
LAWS(RAJ)-1952-9-28
HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN
Decided on September 02,1952

ISHAR Appellant
VERSUS
NAIB-TAHSILDAR OF GOVINDGARH Respondents




JUDGEMENT

Sharma, J. - (1.)These are three similar petitions by certain tenants of certain agricultural lands in Alwar District under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. All of them are directed against 'inter alia' the State of Rajasthan. To the petition No. 97 of 1951 Naib Tehsildar and Re-settlement Tehsildar of Govindgarh Sub-Tahsil in District Alwar and Bachan Singh and Hari Singh of Sub-Tahsil Govindgarh hereinafter to be referred to as "new lessees" have also been made parties. To the petitions Nos. 100 and 115 of 1951, besides the State of Rajasthan, the S. D. O. Resettlement, Alwar District and Naib Tehsildar, Resettlement of Tehsil Mandawar, have also been made parties.
(2.)The case of all the petitioners in their petitions is that they had been tenants of lands given in their petitions for many years and were recorded as such in Revenue Records. Their land-holders migrated to Pakistan after the partition of India, They held these lands as tenants upto May 1951, when the Tehsildar. Resettlement and Naib Tehsildar Sub-Tehsil Mandawar in case No. 97 of 1951 arid S. D. O., Resettlement Alwar District and Re- settlement Naib Tehsildar Mandawar Tehsil in the other two cases took illegal measures to eject the petitioners without serving any notice on them to show cause why they should not be ejected. The lands in question were never declared evacuee properties and the Resettlement Tehsildar and Naib Tehsildar Govindgarh in one case and the Resettlement S.D.O. Alwar District and the Resettlement Naib Tehsildar Mandawar in the other two were not appointed Custodian or Deputy or Assistant Custodian till the dates they made orders of the ejectment of the petitioners. Even a Custodian or Deputy or Asst. Custodian had no right to cancel or vary the terms of a lease granted by his own-self or to evict a lessee without serving upon him a notice under Rule 14, Administration of Evacuee Property Rules, to show cause. The ejectment of a tenant was also illegal unless under certain condition given in Rajasthan Protection of Tenants Ordinance or under Section 180 of Alwar State Land Revenue Code which did not obtain in the present case. It is, therefore, complained that the actions of these authorities were illegal and without jurisdiction. The petitioners, therefore, pray for writ of prohibition against the opposite party restraining them from ejecting the petitioners or cancelling, varying the terms of their leases or terminating them and allotting them to new lessees. It has also been prayed that any such orders made be quashed by a writ of certiorari, or any other writ, direction or order, suitable under the circumstances of the case be issued.
(3.)On behalf of the opposite party, objections have been taken to the petitions on the ground that the petitioners were the tenants of Rajasthan State from year to year; that their yearly leases granted last expired before the orders of ejectment were made & that such orders were made by the Resettlement S.D.O. Alwar District, Resettlement Naib Tehsildar, Mandawar, and Resettlement Tehsildar and Naib Tehsildar Sub Tehsil Govindgarh, as representing Rajasthan State, the lessor and not under the Administration of Evacuee Property Act as Custodians or Deputy or Assistant Custodians. It is also pleaded that there was effective and adequate remedy under Section 7, Rajasthan Protection of Tenants Ordinance, or ordinary law by way of suit.


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.