J.R.CHOPRA, J. - (1.) BY this writ petition, the erstwhile Ruler of the Covenanting State of the Bikaner Dr. Kami Singh who has now expired during the pendency of the writ petition and has been succeeded by his legal representatives brought on record vide order of this Court dt. 21.8.89 have sought following reliefs; (i) 'Section 6(2) along with the proviso to the said Section may he declared unconstitutional and void. (ii) Constitution 40th Amendment Act, 1976 may be declared unconstitutional and void in so far as it makes provision for item No. 163. (iii) The Sub -Divisional Officer (South) Bikaner may be restrained from proceeding to acquire the agricultural lands in possession of the petitioner. (iv) Any other appropriate Writ, Direction or order that may be deemed expedient for the ends of justice may be issued. (v) Cost be awarded.
(2.) THE contention of the petitioner Dr.Karni Singh now succeeded by his legal representatives was that he was erstwhile Ruler of Bikaner at the time of the merger of the State of Bikaner at with the Union of India and an inventory of the personal and private properties of the Ruler of Bikaner was prepared in pursuance of Article XII of the Covenant and that inventory stands finally approved by the Central Government. The petitioner thus, became the owner of the properties, the particulars of which were given in the inventory, approved by the Central Government, the copy of that inventory has not been produced in the writ petition. The Rajasthan State Legislature enacted Act No. 11 of 1964 named as 'Rajasthan Land Reforms and Acquisition of Landowners' Estates Act 1963' which received the assent on sixth day of April, 1964. This Act later came to be amended by an Act No. 15 of 1975 receiving the assent of the President of India on 26th March, 1975. The petitioner has referred in the writ petition to the definition of land as mentioned in Section 2 -F as originally incorporated in the Act of 1963 as also the definition of 'Land' after the 1975 amendment Act came into force and has also referred to the definition of the 'Estate', 'Landowner' etc. and has further contended as per the amended Act the estate of landowner vested in the Government from appointed dated which was notified as 1.9.1964 and from the date of vesting the right, title and interest of the landowner in the Estate shall vest in the Government free from all encumbrances, The combined effect of Sections 7 and 8 of the 1963 Act is that the Estate and the land of the landowner shall vest in the State Government from 1.9.64 except the land referred to Sub -section 1 of 10.
(3.) SECTION 6(2) of the Act 1963 provides that out of the lands covered by Section 10(1)(a)(i) the lands which are in the personal cultivation of the landowner and in which there are no tenants, the landowner shall, as from the date of vesting, be the Khatedar tenant thereof. The petitioners have admitted that they have lands under their cultivation on which there are no tenants but these lands are included in the inventory of the private properties of the petitioners prepared in pursuance of Article XII of the Covenant. The petitioner does not possess any Other agricultural land which is not included in inventory as aforesaid. On account of the notification issued by the State Government in exercise of powers conferred on it under Section 7 of the Rajasthan Land Reforms and Acquisition of Landowner's Estates Act, 1963 (Rajasthan Act No. 11 of 1964) fixing first day of September as the date of vesting of the landowners' Estate in the Government. As regards the Estate of the late Dr. Karni Singh, the Collector, Bikaner commenced proceedings for acquisitions of certain properties vide notice dated 31.10.1975 and passed an order Annex. 1 dt. 19.12.75 in respect thereof. Certain properties have been exempted from acquisition but it is alleged that in respect of some properties, the matter has been referred by the Collector to the Compensation Commissioner for decision and the Compensation Commissioner has not finally decided the matter. No final order declaring the petitioner as the Khatedar tenant of the lands covered by Section 6(2) of the 1964 Act has also been passed. However, the Sub -Divisional Officer has issued a notice to him for acquisition of his agricultural lands as per provisions of Chapter IIIB of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act, 1955. The petitioner challenged the jurisdiction of the S.D.O. (South), Bikaner to proceed in the matter but that contention has been rejected and he has passed an order for acquisition of agricultural lands in possession of the petitioner except 305 bighas and 12 biswas of the Banjar land. The copy of that order dt. 28.10.71 has been filed as Annex. 2. The appeal preferred by the petitioner before the Revenue Appellate Authority was disposed of vide order dt. 13.9.76, whereby, the R.A.A. sustained the order of the S.D.O. (South), Bikaner that he has jurisdiction to proceed against the ex -Ruler under Chapter IIIB of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act. The revision petition preferred against that order before the Board of Revenue was also failed vide order Annex. 4 dt. 5.9.80 and the review petition was also dismissed vide Annex. 5. dt. 16.9.82. The petitioner has, therefore, challenged these orders and has sought the aforesaid reliefs through this writ petition.;