Shivdayal. C. J.-

1. By this petition under Articles 226 and 227 or the Constitution, the petitioner, Col. Sardar Angre, has sought a writ of certiorari to quash the order of the Commissioner dated December 14, 1962, and the order of the Board of Revenue, dated September 22, 1969, and a writ of mandamus directing the State of Madhya Pradesh and the Commissioner not to deduct the amount of Rs. 1,33,897/8/3 from the amount of compensation payable to him under the M.B. Abolition of Jagirs Act, 1951, and to enhance that compensation to the extent of Rs. 3,738/- (being 7 times of Rs. 534/- representing the Tanka of village Bhaisakhedi).

2. The petitioner Col. Sardar Angre was a Jagirdar of Tahsil Nevri Bhorasa and Panbihar in the erstwhile Gwa1ior State. In 1948, by merger of several princely states, a new state of Madhya Bharat was constituted. Under the Madhya Bharat Abolition of Jagirs Act, 1951, (hereinafter referred to as the Abolition Act); the petitioner's Jagir was resumed on December 4, 1952, under section 3 of the Act, by the state of Madhya Bharat. Section 4 of the Act enacts the consequences or the resumption. Section 8 of the Act provides for determination of compensation to be paid to Jagirdars in consequence of the resumption. Accordingly, proceedings were taken for the determination of the compensation payable to the petitioner. The manner of determining compensation is provided in schedule I to the Act. Clause (1) of the schedule defines 'basi cyear'; clause (2) defines 'gross income'; clause (3) defines 'basic income' clause (4) defines 'net income' and clause (5), which defines 'compensatory amount' reads thus :-

"The compensation payable under section 8 to a Jagirdar shall be seven times his net income calculated in accordance with the provisions hereinbefore contained."

3. By his order dated January 11, 1958, the Commissioner determined the compensation payable to the petitioner. Aggrieved by that order, the petitioner preferred an appeal to the Board of Revenue. That appeal (D.B. Appeal No. 16/1958) which was decided on November 9, 1960, was partly allowed. The case was remanded to the Jagir Commissioner with certain directions, holding that (1) Rs. 30,000/- on account of paiga shall not be deducted as Tanka (per discussion in para 12); (2) proportionate amount of Tanka for village Bhaisakhedi shall not be deducted (as discussed in para 13(a); and (3) no deduction shall be made on account of land records management (as discussed in para 16).

4. The Jagir Commissioner, by his order dated December 14, 1962, redetermined the amount of compensation. Regarding the question of Paiga, the Commissioner gave effect to the aforesaid decision of the Board of Revenue and did not deduct Rs. 30,000/-. The state preferred an appeal to the Board of Revenue (D.B. Appeal No. 31-I of 1963) contending that in the earlier dicision of the Board of Revenue (dated November 9, 1960), all that was held was that Rs. 30,000/- could not be deducted "as Tanka." but the Commissioner should have held that amount could be deducted under item No.6 of paragraph 4 of schedule 1 to the Act. A preliminary objection was raised by Sardar Angre that a new ground could not be taken in that subsequent appeal before the Board of Revenue inasmuch as it was barred as constructive res judicata. That preliminary objection was rejected by the Board. Sardar Angre filed a writ petition in this Court (Misc. Petition No. 307 of 1963). A Division Bench consisting of Dixit, C.J. and Pandey, J. held that the new plea raised by the State Government in the subsequent appeal (No. 31-I of 1963) was barred by constructive res judicata, as it had not been raised in the earlier appeal (No. 16 of 1958). Aggrieved by that order of the High Court, the state preferred an appeal to the Supreme Court (Civil Appeal No. 459 of 1966), 1970 RN 1 =1970 JLJ 44 (SC). It was held by the Supreme Court that by virtue of section 151 of the M.B. Land Revenue and Tenancy Act, the provision