The decision of the Government of Orissa to annul the grant was an act of State not justiciable in Municipal Courts, and the refusal to recognize the grant by the new sovereign was not justiciable, barring the grantee from legal rights against the new sovereign.

NARASIMHAM, C. J.

( 1 ) THIS is an appeal by the State of Orissa against the decision of the Subordinate Judge of Dhenkanal decreeing the plaintiff-respondent's suit for declaration of title and ether consequential reliefs in respect of 13 villages in the district of Dhenkanal on the strength of a grant made in her favour by the Ruler of Dhenkanal on 14th May, 1939.

( 2 ) THE respondent plaintiff is the Rani Sahiba of Dhenkanal, her husband, the Raja Sahib of Dhenkanal being the Ruler of Dhenkanal which was a Feudatory State under the paramountcy of the British Crown till the lapse of paramountcy with the passing of the Indian Independence Act, 1947. The plaintiff's husband (P. W. 1), Raja Sankar Pratap Singh Deo Mahendra Bahadur, was married to her sometime in 1924. In 1935 he made a grant of 8684. 55 acres of land (Ex. A) in her favour. The reason for the grant, as stated in that document, Ext. A was that "on the analogy of the precedents that are in vogue in the family of the Rulers of the State since time immemorial, the Rani Sahiba is allowed Khanja grant in the shape of Khamar lands and tenure. . . . . . . . . " This grant was given effect to in due course. It further appears that out of the total grant of 8684. 55 acres, about 791 acres consisted of lands in the occupation of tenants, about 363 acres were in the khas possession of the grantor, namely the respondent, and the remaining lands were all jungle and waste. The grant included rights over minerals, quarries, fisheries and forests. In 1939 the Ruler made another grant in favour of his wife (Ext. 1) (hereinafter referred to as the "impugned grant") by which he assigned to her full right over 13 villages in Dhenkanal State including the rights over forests, mineral, fisheries, etc. As the validity of this latter grant is the subject matter of the present litigation. I may quote the same in lull :

"i Raja Shankar Pratap Singh Deo Mahindra Bahadur do hereby pass the following orders on the analogy of the precedents that are in vogue, in the family of the Rulers of this State since time immemorial. 1. Srijukta Rani Saheba is allowed Khanja grant in the shape of khamar lands and tenures in the villages specified in schedule A hereto attached. This grant carries with it the enjoyment of all forests waters, minerals, wood, stone and fisheries which may exist now or hereinafter within the lands. 2. Over and above these properties Srijukta Rani Sahiba is entitled to appropriate to herself the income of these khamar lands which she has of late reclaimed as mentioned in Schedule B hereto attached. 3. The State will have no claim whatsoever to any of these lands and the incidents attached to them regarding school and forest and local cesses will be the same as in the case of other Khanja grants already made in favour of the other members of the Raj family. 4. The Officials of the State cannot and should not interfere in any way with the rights of Srijukta Rani Sahiba except so far as the question of general administration is concerned. 5. This order will take effect from the 1st January 1940 (1345 Sal Solapan Amli ). Sd. S. P. S. D. M. Bahadur. Darbar Dhenkanal State. "

In paragraph 2 of the aforesaid grant there is art indirect reference to the previous grant of 1935 which has been included in the Schedule B. In the impugned grant also the reason for the grant was said to be "the analogy of the precedents that are in vogue in the family of the Rulers of this State since time immemorial. " But there was considerable difficulty in putting the Rani Sahiba in possession of the thirteen villages on the basis of the impugned grant. The then Chief Minister of the State Shri A. K. Khan raised some objections in his note dated 11th January 1940 (Ext. 2) and also directed the Mutation Officer, by his order dated 13th May, 1940 (Ext. 4/g), to stay the correction of the record until further orders.

( 3 ) THE impugned grant was the subject matter of some discussion between the Ruler and