C.M. LODHA, C.J.—This writ petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India is directed against two orders of the Board of Revenue for Rajasthan; one by the Single Member of the Board (Ex.5) dated January 21, 1969 and the other by the Division Bench of the Board (Ex.6) dated January 28, 1977, whereby the Board held that the petitioners are not entitled to get their names recorded in record of rights in respect of land measuring 319 Bighas and 2 Biswas, in Khasra No. 609, situated in Mouza Gangrar.

2. It is the admitted case of the parties that Mouza Gangrar was a Jagir village of Rao Manohar Singhji of Bedla, who, by a registered sale-deed dated May 24, 1958 sold the land in question to the petitioners. The petitioners case is that on resumption of the Jagir of Rao Manohar Singhji with effect from August 21, 1954, the land in question became his "Khatedari" land under section 10 of the Rajasthan Land Reforms and Resumption of Jagirs Act, 1952. It appears that after purchasing the land in question, the petitioners made an application to the Gram Panchayat, for mutating their names as "khatedars" in place of Rao Manohar Singhji, but, under the instructions of the Collector of the District, the Gram Panchayat, ultimately, disallowed the petitioners request, by its order dated February 3, 1963. Thereupon, the petitioners filed an appeal before the Collector, who dismissed the same by his order dated March 3, 1963 (Ex.3). Aggrieved by the decision of the Collector, the petitioners filed appeal before the Revenue Appellate Authority, which allowed the petitioners appeal by its order dated March 5, 1964 (Ex.4) and directed that the petitioners names may be mutated and entries may be made in the revenue records in their favour. Dissatisfied with the decision of the Revenue Authority, respondents Nos. 1 to 4, who are villagers of Mouza Gangrar, filed a revision application before the Board of Revenue for Rajasthan, which was laid before a Single Member of the Board, who, by his order dated January 21, 1969 (Ex.5), held that in view of the provisions contained in sec. 16 of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act, "khatedari" rights could not accrue in respect of the land in question, which was covered by clauses (2) and (3) of section 16 of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act. It was observed that the land in question was used for casual or occasional cultivation in the bed of the tank and that it was covered by water and used for the purposes of growing "singhara" or the like produce. In this view of the matter, he allowed the revision application and set aside the order of the Revenue Appellate Autho-rity and restored that of the Collector. The petitioners then filed special appeal which too was dismissed by a Division Bench of the Board by its order dated January 28, 1977 (Ex.6).

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners has urged that under sec. 10 of the Rajasthan Land Reforms and Resumption of Jagirs Act, 1952, the land in question, which was "khudkasht" land of the Jagirdar, will be deemed to be held by the Jagirdar as a "khatedar" tenant as from the date of resumption of the Jagir. It is submitted that in the present case, the Jagir was resumed on August 21, 1954 and the "khatedari" rights, which had vested in the Jagirdar, could not be taken away by section 16 of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act, which deals with the question of accrual of "khatedari" right after coming into force of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act. However, as we shall presently show, it is not necessary to decide this question of law in the present case inasmuch as this petition can be disposed of an other grounds. We should, therefore, not be taken to express any view in the matter either way.

4. It may be pointed out that the petitioners made an application under section 125 of the Land Revenue Act, which reads as under,—

"125. Settlement of disputes as to entries in record of rights.—-All other disputes regarding entries in the record of rights shall be decided on the basis of possession.

(2) If

Click Here to Read the rest of this document