Ramaswami, J.

1. In this case the petitioner, Khan Bahadur Mahabat Jung, has obtained a rule from the High Court calling upon the opposite parties to show cause why a writ In the nature of mandamus should not be issued commanding the opposite parties not to give effect to the provisions of the Bihar Land Reforms Act (Bihar Act 30 of 1950) with regard to the estates of the petitioner located in the districts of Patna, Santal Parganas and Purnea. Cause has been shown by the learned Government Advocate on behalf of the State of Bihar and other opposite parties to whom notice of the rule was ordered to be given,

2. The petitioner is the grandson of the late Nawab Nazim of Bengal. He owns very extensive properties, including the proprietary and tenure rights, in the districts of Purnea, the Santal Parganas and Patna in the State of Bihar. These properties once belonged to the late Nawab Nazim of Bengal, who on the 12th March 1891, entered into an agreement with the Secretary of State for India by which Nawab Nazim relinquished for himself, his heirs and successors all the claims to the position and dignity of Nawab Nazim in consideration of a covenant that the Nawab Bahadur and