D.P.GPTA, C.J. - (1.) THESE two special appeals arise out of an order passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court, partly allowing the writ petition filed by Rao Baldeo Singh and Ors.
(2.) THE facts which have given rise to these special appeals may be briefly stated: Rao Baldeo Singh is the Ex -Jagirdar of Sattasar in District Bikaner, whose Jagir was resumed under the provisions of the Rajasthan Land Reforms and Resumption of Jagirs Act, 1952 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) on August 15, 1954. Thereafter on August 23, 1954, the Collector, Bikaner, within whose jurisdiction the area comprised in Rao Baldeo Singh's Jagir was situated, gave a notice to him directing him to hand over possession of his Jagir and all records connected therewith to the Tehsildar, Bikaner. Rao Bildeo Singh did not comply with the directions contained in the notice given by the Collector, Bikaner and filed a writ petition in this Court which was dismissed. Rao Baldeo Singh also filed a petition under Article 32 of the Constitution before the Supreme Court of India, which was also dismissed on April 15, 1955. Thereafter another notice was issued by the Collector, Bikaner, to the petitioner on May 14, 1955, directing him to hand over charge of his Jagir and its records to the Tehsildar, Bikaner and on September 27, 1955, Rao Baldeo Singh handed over charge of his Jagir to the Tehsildar. On that very day he also submitted a list of his private properties, as envisaged under section 23(1) of the Act. It is alleged that Rao Baldeo Singh owned 1591 Bighas of land in villages Sattasar and Kakrala in District Bikaner, besides other land in District Ganganigr, which were claimed to be under his 'Khud -Kasht'. ft was claimed that land bearing Khasra Nos. 20 and 22, measuring 921 Bighas and 1 Biswa and 79 Bighas and 10 Biswas respectively, situated in village Kakrala and land bearing Khasra Nos. 226 and 227, measuring 375 Bighas and 13 Biswas and 214 Bighas and 10 Biswas respectively, situated in village Sattasar and were under the personal cultivation of Rao Baldeo Singh. It was also claimed that Rao Baldeo Singh enjoyed occupancy rights in respect of the aforesaid lands in accordance with the provisions of the Bikaner Tenancy Act 1945 and as the aforesaid lands were clamied to be under the personal cultivation of Rao Baldeo Singh, they were alleged to be 'Khud -Kasht' lands. The Jagir Commissioner determined the compensation payable to Rao Baldeo Singh under the provisions of the Act, treating the aforesaid lands situated in villages Sattasar and Kakrala as 'Khud -Kasht' lands. As regards the lands situated in District Sri Ganganagar. Rao Baldeo Singh submitted as application on March 18, 1957, before the Tehsildar, Anoopgarh, for correction of the entries relating to the said fields and for entering them as his 'Khud -Kasht' Khatedari lands. The application was eventually forwarded to the Divisional Commissioner, Bikaner, who accorded sanction by his order dated November 30, 1958, and directed the Collector, Bikaner, to make necessary corrections in the Patwar papers and other revenue records so as to enter the disputed lands as 'Khud -Kasht' lands of Rao Baldeo Singh. On appeal to the Board of Revenue, by its order dated July 24, 1959, the Board held that the matter as to whether the lands were 'Khud -Kasht' lands or not should be referred to the Jagir Commissioner for decision and that the entries existing in the revenue record should not be disturbed until the Jagir Commissioner decided the matter. An order passed by the Additional Jagir Commissioner on October 5, 1959, was also set aside by the Board of Revenue by its order dated April 8, 1960. Tne Board of Revenue was of the view that the Jagir Commissioier was the competent authority for determining the nature of the property under section 23 (2) of the Act. A review application was also dismissed by the Board of Revenue on JuJy 16, 1962.
(3.) THE order passed by the Board of Revenue referring the matter to the Jagir Commissioner was challenged by Rao Baldeo Singh in this Court by means of a writ petition, being D.B. Civil writ Pelition No. 482 of 1962, which was allows! by this Court by its order dated October 7, 1963. This Court was of the view that no inquiry under Section 23(2) of the Act was necessary to be nude in the case and that the matter regarding the correction of entries should have been disposed of in accordance with the procedure prescribed in the Rdjasthan Land Revenue Act.The orders pissed by the Board of Revenue on July 24, 1959, Aprils. 1960 aid July 16, 1962, were set aside by this Court and the Board of Revenve was directe 1 to decide the appeal itself on merits, if sufficient material was available on the record to dispose of the matter finally or to pass such other order which it might consider fit in the circumstances of the case.;