- (1.) THIS appeal has been preferred by State of Rajasthan and others against judgment dated 03.10.2006 of learned Single Judge by which writ petition filed by petitioner -respondent Anjuman Society Khandan -E -Amiriya Tonk, (for short, 'the respondent Society') was allowed and appellant State was directed to pay 'khandan' allowance to members of respondent society as per increased rates.
(2.) SHRI Phool Singh Meena, Treasury Officer, representative of appellants State, appeared and made submissions on behalf of appellants. No one has appeared on behalf of respondent Society. The matter was nevertheless considered on merits. Respondent Society claims itself to be a registered society consisting of members of Khandan of His -Highness Nawab -Amir -Ud -Daulah, erstwhile Ruler of the then State of Tonk. It was contended that members of respondent Society were receiving 'khandan' allowance under provisions of Tonk State Khandan Rules, 1944 (for short, 'the Rules of 1944'). The Rules of 1944 were published in State Gazette extraordinary on 25.05.1944 under command of the Nawab of erstwhile Tonk State by the Darbar Secretary Mirza Amir Ali Khan. The Rules of 1944 constituted 'Law' made by the sovereign authority and had statutory force. With aim and object to abolish the cash jagir etc. within territory of Rajasthan State, the Rajasthan Legislature published Rajasthan Cash Jagir Abolition Act, 1958 (for short, 'the Act of 1958') on 13.07.1958. The State Government issued an order on 13.12.1969, which was published in Rajasthan Gazette Part -I (Kha) dated 12.02.1970, whereby provisions of the Act of 1958 were exempted in respect of persons who were governed by the Act of 1944.
(3.) THIS Court in Anjuman Society Khandan -E -Amiriyas Tonk v. State of Rajasthan 1994 (2) WLC (Raj.) 538, while deciding Writ Petition No. 3072/1990 vide judgment dated 28.07.1994, held that Rules of 1944 still hold the field as "law in force" and allowed writ petition quashing orders dated 26.07.1986 and 03.08.1987. By those two orders, the Government restricted payment of 'khandan' allowance only to those who are not in government service or who are not having income of more than five hundred rupees or who are not getting old pension. As a result thereof, some of persons, who were otherwise getting pension, were denied benefit of pension and this Court in Anjuman Society Khandan -E -Amiriyas Tonk's case (supra) held that aforesaid Government orders amounting to amendment in the Rules of 1944 were absolutely devoid of jurisdiction and that such amendment in the Rules by administrative instructions were not permissible. Government orders dated 26.07.1986 and 03.08.1987 were therefore quashed. This Court in aforesaid judgment relied on earlier judgment of this Court in Abdul Karim Khan v. State of Rajasthan 1961 RLW 386, wherein a Division Bench of this Court held that the Rules of 1944 were not mere administrative or executive instructions issued by the then Ruler. The Rules of 1944 constituted 'law', made by the sovereign authority and had statutory force. In fact judgment of Division Bench of this Court in Abdul Karim Khan's case (supra) was based on Supreme Court judgment in Ameer -un -Nissa Begum and Ors. v. Mahboob Begum and Ors. : AIR 1955 SC 352. In that case question before Supreme Court was whether 'Furmaan' issued by the Nawab of Hyderabad was having force of law and it was held "prior to the integration of Hyderabad State with the Indian Union and coming into force of the Indian Constitution, the Nizam of Hyderabad enjoyed uncontrolled sovereign powers. He was the supreme legislature, the supreme judiciary and the supreme head of the executive, and there was no constitutional limitations upon his authority to act in any of these capacities. The 'Furmaans' were expressions of the sovereign, will of the Nizam and they were binding in the same way as any other law." The same view was reiterated in Director of Endowments v. Akram Ali and Ors. : AIR 1956 SC 60 and in Madhaorao v. State of Madhya Bharat : AIR 1961 SC 298.;