- (1.) In the writ petitions filed, the petitioners sought for declaring the words occurring in sub-section (2-A) of Section 15-AAA of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act i.e. "prepared during the survey or resurvey and record operations conducted under Sections 106 and 107 of the Rajasthan Land Revenue Act, 1956 " as invalid and for quashing the same. The High Court by the impugned judgment did not declare the said provision as invalid but has explained the applicability of the said provision by reading them appropriately. The last two paragraphs of the impugned judgment read thus: "The only relief which the petitioner can claim is, that benefits of sub-section (2-A) of Section 15-AAA can be conferred on all those khatedar tenants who fall under the relevant sections of the Tenancy Act and whose names do appear in the record-of-rights of the revenue papers, having succeeded or acquired such status, therefore, in construing harmonious construction so as to avoid any discrimination, the benefits of sub-section (2-A) of Section 15-AAA as amended shall also accrue to all those persons whose names are found in the survey or resurvey as conducted under Sections 106 and 107 of the Revenue Act or otherwise mentioned in the revenue record-of-rights. In view of the above, there is hardly any necessity to declare invalid or quash a part of sub-section (2) as prayed in the writ petitions but the writ petitions are disposed of in the terms as mentioned above to the fact that not only those tenants as mentioned in sub-section (2-A) of Section 15-AAA of the Act whose names were found in survey or resurvey are entitled to the rights of khatedari tenants but even those tenants are also entitled to the same rights whose names are entered and incorporated in the revenue record-of-rights, otherwise also subsequent to last survey who might have acquired such status in accordance with law."
(2.) The learned counsel for the appellants contended that the names of the respondents were not at all found in the record-of-rights of the revenue papers and without establishing their claims, no relief could be granted to them. All that we can say is that in the impugned judgment, as can be seen from the paragraphs extracted above, the High Court has explained the position as to the applicability of the provisions, two categories of people covered by the said provisions and no individual relief is granted to the respondents. It is for the respondents to satisfy the authorities concerned if they are entitled to any relief in terms of the impugned judgment. In this view, we do not find any good ground to interfere with the impugned judgment having regard to the harmonious reading of the provisions by the High Court. Hence, the appeals are disposed of accordingly subject to what is stated above.;