- (1.) THIS is an appeal against the order of the Deputy Collector (Jagir), Jhunjhunu dated 6. 7. 64. The respondent is not present despite proper notice. Hence ex-parte proceedings have been taken against him.
(2.) THE learned Government Advocate has attacked only the item of rental income on the ground that the jagir was settled prior to the passing of the award on 6. 7. 64 and the learned Deputy Collector Jagir has erred in allowing the rental income to the respondent according to sec. 7 of the Jagir Act, treating the Jagir to be an unsettled one. He has argued that rule 9 of the Jagir Rules has been amended and according to the amendment if a jagir was settled before the passing of the final award, the income shall be allowed on settled rates and not otherwise. This contention of the learned Government Advocate must prevail. Jagir Rules have statutory force. It appears the case his not been examined from this angle, and the lower court has ignored the effect of the amendment to rule 9. The appeal is accordingly accepted and the case is remanded to the Deputy Collector (Jagir) for rehearing the parties and giving a fresh award in light of the observations made above according to law. .;