This case has come up before me as there was a difference of opinion between the two learned Members who heard this appeal filed by Shri Sitaram Bhandar Trust u/s 39 of the Rajasthan Land Reforms and Resumption of Jagirs Act, 1952, against the orders of the Jagir Commissioner dated 3-9-1964.

The facts of the case are that Thakur Kalyansinghji of Nawalgarh dedicated 401 bighas of land to the temple of Sitaramji constructed by Seth Baldeodasji Jagal Kishoreji, Birla of Pilani in Smt. 1974. He charged a premium of Rs. 6701/-and issued a Sanad in favour of the Birlas, subject to the stipulation which was made in the patta that the rent drived from the land is to be used for the bhog of the Thakurji. The appellants were given the right to construct wells and houses on the land. They were to pay no rent to the grantor. Thereafter this land was sought to be resumed under the Rajasthan Land Reforms & Resumption of Jagirs Act. The appellants contested the resumption of this land under the Jagir Act on the ground that the land was purchased by them for a consideration and was no longer jagir land and could not be resumed under the Jagir Act. The Jagir Commissioner by the order under appeal held that the land that was sold to the Birlas was resumable, as the jagirdars could not sell the culturable land in their jagir villages. They could only transfer tenancy rights. The character of the land sold retained its jagir nature.

It was contended by the learned counsel for the appellants that the land was ZarKharid from the Nawalgarh estate by the Birlas in the long past and any of the subsequent circulars of the Jaipur State putting restrictions on the alienation of the jagir lands could not have retrospective effect and could not prevent the appellants from acquiring full proprietary rights. The appellants were the purchasers of the proprietary rights of the land and it no longer remained a jagir land The ruling given by the Special Board in the case of Shri Rawatmal v/s Th. Malsingh (1957 RRD 43) was based on the order of the Jaipur Government of 1925 and could not affect the transaction entered into between the Thakur of Nawalgarh and the appellants a long time ago. The counsel, therefore, urged that this land could not be resumed.

The reply of the Government Advocate was that the land was initially given for the maintenance of the temple by a deed and the income of the land was to be used for the temple. It was, therefore, in the nature of a sub-grant and could not operate as a sale.

The learned Member Shri Gajendra Singh, who wrote the first judgment found that the transaction entered into between the appellants and the ex-jagirdar of Nawalgarh is a very old one and dates back to Smt. 1974, Thus, the rule laid down in Rawatmal v/s Th. Malsingh (1957 RRD 43) based on the Jaipur Standing Order dated 7-11-25 was not applicable. He observed that the question for determination was, what right, title and interest the ex-jagirdar of Nawalgarh had in the estate and what title was sought to be conveyed through the grant deed conveying 401 bighas of land. He argued that a jagirdar holds land by way of grant from the sovereign ruler. The characteristic of a jagir grant according to the well settled Jagir laws is that it is resumable at will by the sovereign ruler. It is a subject matter of re grant on each succession. The estate is inalienable. He observed that all these characteristics of the jagir have received the recognition and judicial scrutiny in the case decided by their lordships of the Supreme Court in Virendrasingh & others v/s State of Uttar Pradesh (AIR 1954 SC 447). The Board of Revenue have also given consideration to this fact in the larger Bench appeal No. 34 of Bhiiwara of 1958 in the case of Maharaj Hamirsingh v/s State of Rajasthan (1960 RRD 117). In this view of the matter it was held by Shri Gajendra Singh that the deed of grant in favour of the appellants could have only operated by way of conferring khatedari rights in the agri

Click Here to Read the rest of this document