Peshkush payable by a landholder is land revenue within the meaning of the Andhra Land Revenue (Surcharge) Act, 1956, and the levy of surcharge on peshkush does not amount to acquisition of property without compensation under Article 31 of the Constitution.

CHANDRA REDDY, C. J.

( 1 ) THIS is an appeal against the Judgment of Ansari, J. , dismissing w. P. No. 66 of 1957 filed by the appellant for quashing the order of the deputy Tahsildar confirming that of the Revenue Inspector, levying a surcharge on the peshkush payable by the appellant.

( 2 ) THE appellant is the proprietor of Nagur estate now situated in the East godavari district. It was formerly in the Chanda district of the then Central Provinces but subsequently transferred to the Madras Presidency from 1st July, 1909, now forms part of the State of Andhra Pradesh. By virtue of the Central Regulation i of 1909, the Madras Estates Land Act, 1908, was made applicable to the appellant s estate and it is now taken over by the Government under the provisions of the Madras estates (Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari) Act (XXVI of 1948 ). It is the case of the appellant that as a proprietor he used to collect the land revenue on behalf of the Government from the ryots and pay to the Government after keeping a part of the revenue, the payment payable to the Government being known as peshkush which was fixed and settled by agreement with the Government.

( 3 ) WHILE so, pursuant to the power conferred by Andhra Land Revenue (Surcharge) act, 1956 (II of 1956), the Revenue Inspector, by his order dated 4th April, 1957, called upon the appellant to pay a surcharge of Rs. 3,535-3-0 on the peshkush of rs. 7,071-9-0 payable by him to the Government. The appellant carried this matter in appeal to the Deputy Tahsildar without any success. It is to remove the order of the Revenue Inspector as confirmed by the Deputy tahsildar on Certiorari that the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the constitution was invoked.

( 4 ) SEVERAL grounds were taken in the petition questioning the legality of the surcharge namely, that peshkush was not land revenue within the sweep of the Act, that any attempt to increase what had been fixed under the permanent settlement was beyond the competence of the State Legislature that the tax was outside Entries 45, 46, 49 and 60 of List II of the Seventh Schedule to the Constitution and, lastly, that the provision of Regulation XXV of 1802 (Permanent Settlement Regulation), under which the undertaking not to increase had been given, was a special enactment and was hot repealed by Act II of 1956 under which the increase was claimed. The learned Judge negatived all these contentions and dismissed the writ petition. It is this order that is now under appeal.

( 5 ) IN this appeal, learned counsel for the appellant has confined himself to ground no. 1 already referred to and raised a fresh objection, namely, that since the levy of surcharge amounts to wiping out the rights of the appellant in the property and since no compensation was provided by the Act, it should be struck down as being repugnant to Article 31 of the Constitution.

( 6 ) BEFORE we consider the soundness of these contentions, it is useful to refer to the relevant sections of this Act (II of 1956 ). Section a gives the definitions and by subsection (2) land revenue is defined as follows :" 2. (2) land revenue means- (a) in the case of an estate (notified under the Madras Estates (Abolition and Conversion into ryotwari) Act, 1948 (Madras Act XXVI of 1948), the land revenue payable under section 23 of that act (b) in the case of an inam on which assessment is leviable under section 3 of the Andhra Inams (Assessments) Act, 1955 (Andhra Act XVII of 1955) the quit rent, jodi, kattubadi, or other amount of a like nature which would have been payable but for the levy of assessment under the said section 3 : and (c) in every other case, the public revenue due on land, and includes in all the cases aforesaid the water cess payable in respect of the land, but does not include the land cess payable under section 78 of the Madras District Boards Act, 1920 (Madras Act xiv of 1920) and the education-tax-payable under section 34 of the Madras Educat

Click Here to Read the rest of this document