Jagat Narayan, J.—This execution case has been withdrawn from the court of the District Judge under Art. 228 of the Constitution under order dated May 7, 1958 of this Court in Civil Miscellaneous Writ Petition No. 169/57. Notice was issued to the State also as the constitutionality of the Rajasthan Jagirdars Debt Reduction Act, 1956 has been challenged in this case.

2. The facts are briefly these. Mukanchand obtained a decree against Rao Raja Inder Singh for Rs. 1,14.581/14/(6 on 18th February 1954 on the facts of 3 mortgage-deeds dated 26.2.48 for Rs 25,000/-, dated 16.5.48 for Rs. 40,000/- and dated 25.10.48 for Rs 15.000/- respectively. The loans were taken on the security of two jagirs villages and certain other non-jagir immovable property. The latter property was sold in execution for Rs. 33,750/- and the sale proceeds were paid to the decree-holder in partial satisfaction of the decree.

3. On 14th December 1956 the decree-holder applied for attachment of the amount payable to the judgment-debtor by way of compensation and rehabilitation grant in connection with the resumption of his jagir under the Rajasthan Jagir Resumption Act, 1952. The judgment-debtor filed two applications on 29th July 1957 and 31st July 1957 in which it was prayed (1) that the decretal debt should be reduced in accordance with section 4 of the Rajasthan Jagirdars Debt Reduction Act, 1956 (hereinafter called the impugned Act) and (2) that only half of the compensation and rehabilitation grant payable to him was liable to attachment under sec. 7 of the aforesaid Act and the remaining amount was unattachable.

4. The decree-holder then filed Civil Miscellaneous Writ Petition No. 169/57 under Art. 228 of the Constitution praying that the execution case be withdrawn to this Court as he wanted, to challenge the constitutionality of the impugned Act.

5. According to the preamble the impugned Act was enacted for scaling down the debts of Jagirdars whose jagir lands bad been resumed under the Resumption of Jagirs Act. Under sec. 2(e) of the impugned Act debt has been defined as follows :

Debt means an advance in cash or in kind and includes any transaction which is in substance a debt but does not include an advance as aforesaid made on or after the first day of January 1949 or a debt due to :—

(i) the Central Government or Government of any State;

(ii) a local authority;

(iii) a scheduled bank;

(iv) a co-operative society; and

(v) a waqf, trust or endowment for a charitable or religious purpose only; or

(vi) a person, where the debt was advanced on his behalf by the Court of Wards.

6. It was argued on behalf of the decree-holder that the date 1.1.1949 is arbitrary, has no rational nexus with the object to be achieved by the enactment and has resulted in unjustified discrimination between the creditors who advanced loans to jagirdars before that date and those who advanced loans to them after that date. Creditors who advanced loans to Jagirdars before 1.1.1949 have been subjected to disability by the provisions of this Act. We are satisfied that this contention has no force.

7. The laws of various covenanting States of Rajasthan afforded protected to Jagirdars in respect of the attachment and sale of jagir lands. The result was that many of them used to borrow money freely. These jagirs were resumed and they became entitled to compensation which is attachable in execution of decrees. In order to save much indebted Jagirdars from being ruined the impugned Act was enacted in order to protect them against debts which they had incurred when they did not know that their Jagirs would be resumed. It was not necessary to grant any protection to them against debts which they incurred after they came to know that their jagirs were likely to be resumed. 1st January 1949 is the date by which in the opinion of the legislature it was generally known that jagirs would be resumed by the State. The process of integration of States in Rajasthan had started in the year 1948. The United St

Click Here to Read the rest of this document