- (1.) THIS appeal has been filed under sec. 39 of the Rajasthan Land Reforms and Resumption of Jagirs Act 1952 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) against an order of the Deputy Collector Jagir, Jaipur dated 5. 12. 57 in a case under s. 36 (11) of the Act.
(2.) WE have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have examined the record as we'll. The validity of the lower court's decision has been challenged before us on two grounds which shall be dealt with separately. The first contention is that the learned Deputy Collector, Jagir, had no authority to determine the award finally as he was authorised to make provisional determination only. Notification No. 3617/jc/56, dated 8th May, 1956, published in Rajasthan Raj Patra of 9-5 1956 delegated certain powers to the Collectors and the Commissioners. This notification was issued by the Jagir Commissioner in exercise of the powers conferred on him by sub-sec. (2) of sec. 42 (a) of the Act as amended by Act Nos. XXIII of 1 (954 and XVII of 1955 with the previous sanction of the Government. It is further provided in this notification that in the Districts where Deputy Collectors Jagirs have been appointed or may hereafter be appointed the powers delegated under this notification to the Collector may be exercised by such Deputy Collector Jagir. Reliance has been placed by the appellant upon item 11 of this notification. The schedule appended to this notification is divided into four columns. The first column relates to serial number, the second column gives the section of the Act. The description of the powers to be delegated is given in the third column and in the fourth column the officer to whom the power is delegated is specified. In item 11 the sections referred to are sec. 32, and sec. 38-B (2 ). In the third column the following words occur "to enquire into and provisionally determine the amount of compensation and rehabilitation grants payable to a Jagirdar whose gross annual income does not exceed Rs. 5,000/-" It has been argued before us that as the word provisionally' has been used in this description the authority to determine the compensation and rehabilitation grant finally should be excluded from the purview of this notification. This interpretation is clearly untenable for a variety of reasons. In the first place in column 2 sec. 32 has been indicated. This section is sub-divided in two parts. Sub sec. (i) relates to provisional determination of the compensation and sub-clause (2) to its final determination. If the inten:ion had been to restrict this delegation only to provisional determination the section referred to in this column should have been 32 (1) and not '32' as it stands in the notification. This gives indication that the entire powers under sec. 32 were intended to be delegated to the Collector where the gross annual income did not exceed Rs. 5,000/ -. Sec. 38b (a) does not contemplate any provisional determination but only a final determination. Secondly item 9 and 13 of this notification have also to be looked into in this context. Item 9 relating to secs. 31 (1) and 38-B (l) authorises the Collector to entertain claim for compensation and rehabilitation giant submitted by a Jagirdar whose gross annual income does not exceed Rs. 5,000/ -. The word 'entertain' as defined in the Chamber's Twentieth Century Dictionary means "to receive and take into consideration. " While defining the pecuniary jurisdiction of a court this word is employed to denote the authority to try and finally determine suits which fall within the pecuniary limit. They very fact that the word 'entertain has been used in the context shows that the Jagir Commissioner intended that the authority to hear and determine such clams should be delegated to the Collectors. This intention stands further corroborated by referring to the whole sec. 32 in item 11. Similarly in item 13 of this notification the authority to communicate the final order made under sub-sec. (2) of sec. 32 has been delegated to the Collector. This leaves no room to doubt that the intention was to authorise the Collector to make final decision under sec. 32 (2) in cases where gross income does not exceed Rs. 5 000/ -. The reason for this delegation is not far to seek. It is common knowledge that the number of Jagirs to be resumed under the Act runs into six digits and to require the Jagir Commissioner to finalise all the claims for compensation would be to place such work load upon that officer as it would be physically impossible for him to discharge besides involving huge delays in the disposal of these claims. If was, therefore, decided that claims in cases of gross incomes upto Rs. 5,000/- should be finalised by the Collector, between Rs. 5,000/- to Rs. 10,000/- by the Commissioner and above that amount by the Jagir Commissioner. Hence we are clearly of the opinion that the Deputy Collector Jagir was within his auhority in finally determining the compensation and rehabilitation grant. The other contention relates to the fact that the Jagirdar has made a claim in respect of some land which was not recorded in his Jagir in the record of Rights prepeared during the settlement operations that it was wrongly entered in the Khalsa Patti and that his claim in that behalf is pending before a revenue court. Much need not be said on the point. The resumption will be effective in respect of the area which has been taken out of the possession of the Jagirdar and has been resumed under the Act. Compensation and Rehabilitation grant shall be given to him in respect of the area resumed from him. When the area in dispute is not so included no question for compensation can arise in anticipation of any verdict that may or may not go in favour of the Jagirdar. There is thus no substance in this appeal which is hereby rejected. .;