Bapna J. - (1.) THIS is a petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution.
(2.) THE case of the petitioner is that he was muafidar of 417 Bighas and 9 Biswas of land situate in village Hingtara,tehsil Sarwar, District Ajmer. THE grievance of the petitioner is that although there was no notification directing resumption of the class of Jagir held by the petitioner, yet the Tehsildar gave orders to take possession of the same. THE second grievance, which is in alternative, is that the entire area of the land held by him is Khud-Kasht and under sec. 23 of the Rajasthan Land Reforms and Resumption of Jagirs Act, 1952, such land is not liable to resumption. THE only respondent in the petition is Tehsildar of Sarwar, who has not filed any reply in the case. Learned counsel for the petitioner, however, conceded that the muafi held by the petitioner cames within one or the other notification for resumption issued under sec. 21 of the Act and the first point was not canvassed. Learned counsel for the petitioner laid stress on the second ground of his petition and argued that the Tehsildar had committed error in interfering with the possession of the petitioner over the lands, which were recorded as Khud-kasht in the revenue records. After a notification has been issued under S. 21,the rules provide for the mode of taking over charge of the resumed jagir. R. 22 provides that the Jagirdar shall submit to the officer taking over such charge (mentioned in Rule 21) a list of the properties which he claims under sub. sec. (1) of sec. 23 of the Act to be his private and personal properties. Such officer is directed to give a receipt for the list in his own handwriting and is further directed to desist from taking over possession or charge of the properties specified in such list. The provision in the rules is, therefore, for the Jagirdar to claim any property as his private property under sec. 23 and Khudkasht land is only one class of such properties, which he can claim for himself and is not liable to be resumed. The rules further provide that if the officer does not agree that the property claimed is liable to be resumed, he! shall record the reasons for such opinion and refer the matter to the Jagir Commissioner for decision. The Jagir Commissioner is authorised under sec. 23, sub-sec. (2) to decide the question, after an enquiry for which provision is also made in the rules. Sec. 39 of the Act provides for appeals against the decision of the Jagir Commissioner. There is no allegation in the present petition that a list was handed over to the officer who took charge of the Jagir of the petitioner claiming that the lands in dispute were his Khudkasht. In the circumstances it is not possible for this Court to interfere at this stage. It is upto the petitioner to prefer the claim under Rule 22 or to raise the question before the Jagir Commissioner. There is no force in this petition. It is accordingly dismissed. There will be no order as to costs, as no reply has been filed on behalf of the respondent. .;