Judgment

SABYASACHI MUKHARJI, JJ.

( 1 ) THIS appeal by special leave is from the judgment and order of the High Court of Andhra Pradesh dated 15th of April, 1986. On or about 10th of April, 1948 Saif Nawaz Jung, the then ruler of Hukkalla State, South Yeman in Arabia settled some of the properties with which the appeal is concerned by a Registered Tamleeknama in favour of his son Sultan Awaz and his grandson Galib Bin Awaz. In 1954, there was Wakfnama by the said Saif Nawaz Jung. On or about 23rd of August, 1963 the Military Estate Officer, Secunderabad of Andhra Pradesh requested for the requisition of the property named as "saif Gulshan" with a vast extent of land and palaces with roads and surrounded by a compound wall measuring 19 acres and 10 guntas situated in the heart of Hyderabad city near Sarojini Devi Hospital. The property in question was taken possession of on or about 12th of September, 1963. In this appeal we are concerned with the claim for compensation for the said acquisition by one Abdul Khader who was a flower picker. He had claimed rights as a tenant during the requisition. His claim for compensation for requisition was settled by sharing the rent in or about 1969. The appellant is one of the owners of the property in question deriving their title and right from the said Saif Nawaz Jung. On or about 3/02/1970 the Collector issued notice for acquisition of the property under S. 7 (1), Requisitioning and Acquisition of Immovable Property Act, 1952, being Act 30 of 1952 (hereinafter called the Central Act ). The Gazette Notification for the acquisition was issued on 12/03/1970. The controversy in this case relates to the question whether Abdul Khader was a protected tenant under the Andhra Pradesh (Telangana Area) Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1950 being Act No. XXI of 1950 (hereinafter called the-Andhra Pradesh Act ). The purpose of the said Act as the Preamble states was, inter alia, to enable the landholders to. prevent the excessive sub-division of agricultural holdings and empower government to assume in certain circumstances the management of agricultural lands, to provide for the registration of Co-operative Farms and to make further provision for matters incidental thereto. Section 2 (r) states that the expression protected means a person who is deemed to be a protected tenant under the provisions of the said Act. Chapter IV of the Andhra Pradesh Act deals with protected tenants and S. 34 of the said Act provides who is to be considered as a protected tenant and uses the expression that a person shall be subject to the provisions of sub-secs. (2) and (3), be deemed to be a protected tenant in respect of the land if he has fulfilled the conditions mentioned in Cls. (a) and (b) of sub-sec. (1) of S. 34 of the said Act. Sub-section (2) of S. 34 of the said Act also deals with "to be deemed to be a protected tenant in respect of any land", for certain purposes. Section 35 of the said Act deals with decision on claims and stipulates by sub-s. (1) of S. 35 of the said Act that if any question arises whether any person, and if so what person, is deemed under S. 34 to be a protected tenant in respect of any land, the landholder, or any person claiming to be so deemed, may, within one year from the commencement of the Act apply in the prescribed form to the Tahsildar for the decision of the question and the Tahsildar shall after enquiring into the claim or claims in the manner prescribed, declare what person is entitled to be deemed to be protected tenant or as the case may be, that no person is so entitled. Sub-section (2) of S. 35 stipulates that a declaration by the Tahsildar that the person is deemed to be a protected tenant or, in the event of an appeal from the Tahsildars decision such declaration by the Collector on first appeal or by the Board of Revenue on second appeal shall be conclusive that such person is a protected tenant and his rights as such shall be recorded in the Record of rights or wh