JUDGMENT

TULZAPURKAR, J.:— The main question raised in this appeal by special leave at the instance of State of Gujarat and the Collector of Sabarkantha against the Gujarat High Courts judgment and order dated January 30/31, 1975 allowing the writ petition of the respondent is whether once the competent authority under S. 2 (4) (i) of the Bombay Merged Territories and Areas (Jagirs Abolition) Act, 1953 (Bombay Act No. XXXIX of 1954) declares that a particular Jagir is a proprietary one, a further inquiry under S. 37 (2) of the Bombay Land Revenue Code (Bombay Act No. V of 1879) with a view to determining whether the jagirdar had any rights to mines or mineral products in his Jagir granted or recognised under any contract, grant or law for the time being in force or by custom or usage is competent?

2. The facts giving rise to the said question are these; By Hajur Order No. 116 dated October 27, 1933, the respondent (Maharaj Shri Amar Singhji Himatsingji) was granted Daljitgarh Jagir comprising of 10 villages mentioned in the said order in jivarak (for maintenance) by the then Ruler of Idar; by another Hajur Order No. 807 dated January 12, 1934, the respondent was given a further gran