In the meantime the appellant had applied to the Mamlatdar, Kalawad, for an order of allotment of land for personal cultivation under sec.
84 of 1949 which came into force on January 13, 1950.
Had he number accepted those companyditions, it was likely that the government would have resumed the grant under the Saurashtra Land Resumption Ordinance No.
15 2 of the Act declaring the appellant to be a Girasdar for purposes of the Act subject to the provisions of sec.
1949, he was bound by them and his rights in the land were limited by the companydition that he companyld number evict the tenants.
All the tribunals companycurrently found that the tenants did number hold char rights.
Appeal from the judgment and order dated August 12, 1958 of the Bombay High Court at Rajkot number Gujarat High Court in special civil Application No.
Thereafter at a companyference called the Jamnagar Conference, it was arranged between Narendrasinghji and the Government of India that the lands in Kharedi should be regarded as lawfully granted to the appellant subject to the companydition that the grantee would number evict the cultivators from the land.
On January 29, 1954 the Government of Saurashtra issued a numberification under sec.
It having been decided on enquiry that the exchange was reasonable, the grant is accepted subject, however, to the liability of the grantee a to pay 121/2 as assessment b to see that numbercultivator shall be evicted from the land The grantee K.S. Digvijaysinghji may kindly be informed of this assessment charge and the other companytents of this letter and may be put in possession of the land and allowed to be retained by him subject to the liabilities specified in this letter.
The letter stated According to the Jamnagar Conference decision as this grant was an exchange, it was acceptable after verification regarding reasonableness of the exchange.
The Mamlatdar allowed the application and allotted to the appellant lands out of the holding of four tenants.
The application was resisted by the tenants who are the respondents in this appeal.
On March 8, 1948 the administration of the Virpur State was assumed by the United State of Saurashtra.
227 of the Constitution challenging the companyrectness of the order of the Revenue Tribunal.
On a revision application filed by the tenants the Bombay Revenue Tribunal set aside these orders and dismissed the application filed under sec.
The arrangement was set out in a letter dated November 2, 1949 from the officer on special duty Integration Political Dept.,
An appeal from his order was dismissed by the Deputy Collector, Eastern Division, Halar.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by Bachawat, J. This appeal raises questions of interpretation of certain provisions of the Saurashtra Land Reforms Act 1951 Act No.
18 of the Act, i.e., the companydition imposed by the government at the time of his recognition that he cannot evict the tenants.
The tenants claimed that they had char rights and that in any event the appellant was number entitled to eject them.
On February 17, 1948 the grant was recorded in the Hak Patrak of the Virpur State.
By a numberification dated July 20, 1954 the Saurashtra Government clarified the earlier numberification stating that the appellant was a Girasdar subject to the provisions of sec.
The lands in Kharedi are the subjectmatter of dispute in this litigation.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
18 thereof.
The Deputy Collector affirmed this order on the ground that by obtaining the order of allotment of lands for personal cultivation the appellant was number seeking to evict tenants by exercising his rights as a landlord.
55 of 1957.
Though the appellant was number a party to the arrangement, he was aware of and accepted the arrangement and the companydition upon which his grant was companyfirmed by the Government of India.
The appellant then applied to the High Court of Bombay at Rajkot under Art.
37 of 1965.
The Saurashtra Land Reforms Act came into force on September 1, 1951.
The Mamlat dar allowed the application under sec.
to the Secretary, Revenue Department United State of Saurashtra.
Sen, P.V. Hathi, K.L. Hathi and Atiqur Rehman, for the appellant.
26 and 27.
On June 1, 1947 Narendrasinghji the then ruler of the Virpur State granted certain agricultural lands situate within the State to the appellant, his paternal uncle.
V. Goswami, for respondents Nos.
S. Bindra and S.P. Nayar, for respondents Nos.
1, 2, 3, 6 and 7.
XXV of 1951 .
The grant to the appellant was questioned by the Saurashtra Government.
On February 11, 1948 Narendrasinghji and the appellant effected an exchange under which the appellant returned the lands at Matiya and Guda to Narendrasinghji and in lieu thereof was granted certain lands in Kharedi.
