Judgment

RAY, J.: This is a common judgment in Writ Petition No. 190 of 1966 and Civil Appeal No. 1949 of 1966. The appellant made an application under Article 226 of the Constitution in the High Court of Punjab some time in the month of August, 1957, inter alia, for the relief as to why the records and proceedings of the case relating to the Dholpur Succession Enquiry Committee and the several notifications in that behalf mentioned in the petition should not be quashed.

2. In the petition under Article 32 of the Constitution the petitioner asked for quashing all actions and proceedings, orders, directions and resolutions in connection with the delivery of the properties of the late Ruler of Dholpur to the respondent Hemant Singh, the adopted son of the late Ruler of Dholpur.

3. For the sake of brevity the petitioner who happens also to be the appellant will be referred to as the petitioner in this judgment.

4. The petitioner alleges that Maharaj Rana Udaibhan Singh of Dholpur died on 22 October, 1954 leaving behind private properties worth more than three crores of rupees. The estate left behind by the said Ruler of Dholpur is claimed to be an impartible estate and, therefore, the petitioner claims to be entitled to the said estate according to law and custom of lineal male primogeniture.

5. The Dholpur State was formed in 1806. After the Indian Independence Act, the Dholpur State became integrated with the Matsya Union some time in the month of March, On 30 March, the United State of Rajasthan was formed. The Matsya Union was eventually merged in the United States of Rajasthan on 15th May, 1949. Some time in the month of March, 1949 there was a Covenant among the Rulers of several States comprised in the United State of Rajasthan. The Covenant, inter alia, provided in Article XII that the Ruler of each covenanting State shall be entitled to the full ownership, use and enjoyment of all private properties belonging to him on the date of his making over the administration of the State to the United State of Rajasthan and if any dispute arose as to whether any item of property is the private property or not, the dispute shall be referred to such person as the Government of India may nominate. Article XIV of the said Covenant provided that succession according to law and customs, to the Gaddi of each covenanting State, and to the personal rights, privileges, dignities and titles of the Ruler were guaranteed and every question of disputed succession in regard to a Covenanting State was to be decided by the Council of Rulers after referring the same to the High Court of the United State of Rajasthan and in accordance with the opinion given by that High Court. On 10 May, 1949 the Dholpur State and other States of the Matsya Union which merged with the United State of Rajasthan adopted the covenant of the Rulers comprised in the United State of Rajasthan.

6. The last Ruler of Dholpur died on 22 October, 1954 and did not leave him surviving any direct male heir. The petitioner alleged that the petitioner and his brother were the sons of the undivided next younger brother of the late Ruler and were, therefore, the next senior survivors to the succession according to the law of primogeniture. The last Ruler of Dholpur left behind him surviving his daughter who was married to the Maharaja of Nabha. The last Ruler s widow adopted a grandson, viz., one of the sons of the daughter and thus arose a controversy as to who was entitled to the Rulership of Dholpur.

7. The Government of India by notification dated 22nd December, 1954 1948 constituted a Committee consisting of the then Chief Justice of the Rajasthan High Court, the Maharaja of Bharatpur and the Maharao of Kotah to examine the contentions of the various claimants and to report to the Government of India who in the judgment of the said Committee was to be recognised by the President as the Ruler of Dholpur. Subsequently, there was a change in the Committee and the Maharao of Kotah was repl