- (1.) THIS revision has been filed against an order of the Tehsildar, Jaipur, dated 8. 9. 1950 directing realisation of arrears outstanding against the Thikana of the applicant. It appears that the applicant first filed an appeal against this order before the Collector, Jaipur on 20. 11. 50 and the same was returned to him on 18. 1. 56 for presentation to the proper court. Hence he has come up in revision before us.
(2.) WE have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have examined the record as well. The proceedings which give rise to this revision (File No. Svt. 2007/91, Bakaya of Tehsil Jaipur) commenced upon a report, dated 4 6-45 of a Tehsil Official to the effect that the work relating to the Khasra and rent collection of the Thikana has been completed. Subsequently it was found that the Thikana owed about Rs. 4000/- to Zanani Dyodi and that Rs. 200/- per annum were being paid by the Thikana towards the discharge of this debt - Rs. 75/-in Kharif and Rs. 125/- in Rabi. The Thikana on being required to pay this amount put up objections to the effect that there were no outstanding against the Thikana as they all had been paid-up and that Accounts Section should be required to verify ail these payments. The record performed numerous journeys in between the offices of the Collector and Tehsildar and at one stage the Collector, ordered that the Thikana was raising frivolous objections with a view to delay the recovery It was observed by the Collector that burden of proving payment of dues rested upon the Thikana and they should discharge it properly and failing which suitable action should be taken against it. The Tehsildar thereupon ordered recovery of the dues by his order dated 8. 9. 1956. In the changed context of events we consider it unnecessary to go into the question as to whether the Tehsildar was or was not justified in passing the order which forms the subject matter of this revision It has been argued before us on behalf of the Thikana that the dues of Zanani Dyodi do not constitute State dues and as such cannot be recovered under the Rajasthan Land Revenue Act, 1956 or the Public Demands Recovery Act. The Tehsildar at one stage came to the conclusion that what was outstanding against the Thikana was a Sarkari Bakaya (Govern-ment Dues ). Even if this position be accepted as correct it will now be found that after the enforcement of the Rajasthan Land Reforms and Resumption of Jagirs Act, 1952 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') the procedure for recovery of these dues has undergone a material change. It has not been disputed before us that the Thikana now stands resumed. All dues and debts outstanding against the Thikana shall now be dealt with in accordance with the provisions contained in secs. 22 (e) and 34 (i) of the Act The manner of determining these dues and debts is provided in Rule 37-C of the Rules framed under the Act Sec. 46 of the Act lays down that any matter which is required to be settled, decided or dealt with by any officer or or authority under the Act shall be excluded from the jurisdiction of Revenue Court. Recovery of dues and debts outstanding against the resumed Thikana is a matter covered by this Act and hence after the enforcement of the Act shall be dealt-with strictly in accordance with the procedure lady down in the Act. We, therefore, allow this revision set aside the order of the Tehsildar dated 8. 9. 1950 and direct that the Collector should take suitable steps for the recovery of these dues and debts in the light of the observations made above. A copy of the judgment should be forwarded to the Collector, Jaipur as well for necessary action. .;